Re: The latest McCann suspect: Scotland Yard has revealed vital new information about a suspect wanted in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

by cookiemuncher Sat Jun 20, 2020 5:40 pm

PeterMac wrote:Just for the record, Wisconsin v Zapata is quoted, with the full reference, in Kate's autobiography. The original case which resulted in a hung jury was in 2006.
He confessed IN FULL, proving the dogs had been absolutely 100% correct in February 2008
Her book was published in 2011.
She, her lawyers, proof readers and editor, and family members had ample opportunity to change the wording of that particular piece.
But they chose not to, and it therefore becomes Exhibit A

There was also the case of the Irish lady who was an informer for the British Police against the I R A as far as I can remember. She disappeared off her doorstep one day, she had many children, but there were rumours about her body being buried on a beach somewhere in Ireland. After 9 years (?) from her disappearance cadaver dogs were brought in and many months later her body was found on a beach, buried about 10 feet deep, 3 metres or more, but the cadaver dogs had done their job, as they were trained to do. Nothing gets passed them, they are so diligent in their duty.

by cookiemuncher Sat Jun 20, 2020 6:09 pm

cookiemuncher wrote:
PeterMac wrote:Just for the record, Wisconsin v Zapata is quoted, with the full reference, in Kate's autobiography. The original case which resulted in a hung jury was in 2006.
He confessed IN FULL, proving the dogs had been absolutely 100% correct in February 2008
Her book was published in 2011.
She, her lawyers, proof readers and editor, and family members had ample opportunity to change the wording of that particular piece.
But they chose not to, and it therefore becomes Exhibit A
There was also the case of the Irish lady who was an informer for the British Police against the I R A as far as I can remember. She disappeared off her doorstep one day, she had many children, but there were rumours about her body being buried on a beach somewhere in Ireland. After 9 years (?) from her disappearance cadaver dogs were brought in and many months later her body was found on a beach, buried about 10 feet deep, 3 metres or more, but the cadaver dogs had done their job, as they were trained to do. Nothing gets passed them, they are so diligent in their duty.

ETA: The lady was one of 9 the I R A confirmed they had killed, she died in 1972, her remains were found in 2003 on a beach in the Republic of Ireland by cadaver dogs.

by Batman Sat Jun 20, 2020 8:15 pm

Verdi wrote:
Batman wrote:
Verdi wrote:
Batman wrote:That would lead to prosecution of Kate & Gerry McCann but you refuse to consider this possibility. Why?

Because it's a load of old codswallop!

Where's Robbyn by the way?

I asked a simple question and you both responded by taking the piss.

That says it all as far as I'm concerned and I'll just leave this here for all to see.

I'm off to enjoy my day.

Just a little banter, Batman. You need a bit of light relief sometimes. Enjoy your day

I can do banter Verdi and thank you, yes I had a great day. So did Robin!

Where were we? Ah yes, I think the german police are onto something and you disagree.

A serious and relevant question for you: is there a definitive statement that tells us the crime being investigated under the Grange remit?

I read the Met's response to Tony's FOI request on this point and concluded that they avoided answering the question.

I'd appreciate your thoughts in this. And anyone else's of course....

by Liz Eagles Sat Jun 20, 2020 8:44 pm

@Batman.

Why do you think the German police are onto something?

by **sharonl** Sat Jun 20, 2020 9:50 pm

Where is the evidence that the German police are even involved?

All we have is media hype.

There is not a shred of evidence to suspect that Bruckner is involved with Madeleines disappearance. Why would any police force make someone a suspect when they have no evidence against him?

Besides, this was a case of a British child going missing in Portugal. This is a Portuguese case, if UK police have no jurisdiction in Portugal then the German police definitely haven't.

by Verdi Sat Jun 20, 2020 10:03 pm

Batman wrote:A serious and relevant question for you: is there a definitive statement that tells us the crime being investigated under the Grange remit?

I'm delighted you had a good day - hope you didn't let your mask slip and you kept your distance smilie

.

If I'm understanding your question rightly then no, there isn't a definitive statement from the Metropolitan Police that tells what crime is being investigated. As you will be aware, the initial recorded remit for Operation Grange was to review the case as if the abduction occurred on UK soil. There has never since been any officially documented statement to indicate a change of direction from the original remit.

Quite possibly because they are not investigating any crime, only posing as a figure head for delusion.

There are however, numerous interviews on record and documented for posterity, showing the general direction of proceeds. Interviews with London police chiefs, Leicestershire constabulary - the initial point of contact for case coordination between Portugal and the UK, and various other nationwide police locations.

I believe the most significant and important question to be addressed is .... 'why after nine years, two years reviewing and seven years re-investigation, are the Metropolitan Police in the guise of Operation Grange, no further forward? More importantly - why have they failed to acknowledge the most compelling evidence and the blatant deception of the McCanns and their group of friends.

Do you really need any more?

by Batman Sun Jun 21, 2020 12:00 am

Liz Eagles wrote:@Batman.

Why do you think the German police are onto something?

Hi Liz. I'm sure you know the Grange case review changed to a criminal investigation, I think in 2014. But the new remit was never published. In fact, the Met coyly avoided answering Tony Bennett's FOI request asking this very question. Isn't that strange?

Given the presence of cadaverine in 5a, it would make sense for the investigation to focus on the unlawful concealment and disposal of a cadaver. And if that's the real remit of Grange, the Met and any other collaborating police force has to keep it quiet to avoid alerting the prime suspects.

With that as background, I'm suggesting that Christian B may have some knowledge or direct involvement in the crime. For me, that's more believable than the idea that the German police are in cahoots with the McCs, or that they're complicit in a UK establishment cover-up.

Thanks for asking and I hope that helps. I'd welcome any further thoughts.

by Batman Sun Jun 21, 2020 12:54 am

Verdi wrote:
Batman wrote:A serious and relevant question for you: is there a definitive statement that tells us the crime being investigated under the Grange remit?
I'm delighted you had a good day - hope you didn't let your mask slip and you kept your distance .

If I'm understanding your question rightly then no, there isn't a definitive statement from the Metropolitan Police that tells what crime is being investigated. As you will be aware, the initial recorded remit for Operation Grange was to review the case as if the abduction occurred on UK soil. There has never since been any officially documented statement to indicate a change of direction from the original remit.

Quite possibly because they are not investigating any crime, only posing as a figure head for delusion.

There are however, numerous interviews on record and documented for posterity, showing the general direction of proceeds. Interviews with London police chiefs, Leicestershire constabulary - the initial point of contact for case coordination between Portugal and the UK, and various other nationwide police locations.

I believe the most significant and important question to be addressed is .... 'why after nine years, two years reviewing and seven years re-investigation, are the Metropolitan Police in the guise of Operation Grange, no further forward? More importantly - why have they failed to acknowledge the most compelling evidence and the blatant deception of the McCanns and their group of friends.

Do you really need any more?

Thanks Verdi. I'm pleased to see we agree on the lack of a defined remit for the criminal investigation.

You suggest this is so they can use it to cover-up the deed and of course that's a possibility. However, that's inconsistent with the involvement of MI5 (assuming you agree they were involved of course). Why is it inconsistent? Remember the Barnes Guest House (PIE HQ) and Cyril Smith investigations of the 80s? Both were closed down by MI5 without any explanation. They could have done the same with MM's disappearance and avoided Grange altogether.

So I prefer to believe the facts as presented: the Grange review was upgraded to a criminal investigation and the exact nature of the crime was hidden to avoid alerting the prime suspects.

I can't explain the length of time the investigation is taking, other than that it's complex and involves a number of people. But I'm going to pick up on your points about the police ignoring evidence of death in 5a and that they're no further forward with the investigation.

Like you, I found it shocking that the Met ignored the cadaverine. It's so shocking as to be unbelievable. So I decided to look at it differently. What if they haven't ignored it? What if that's what they're working on?

Taking that perspective, all the police statements to date can be explained as them continuing to conceal the true nature of their investigations, just as they did when they responded to Tony's FOI request.

The extensive digging in Portugal a few years ago is consistent with them believing MM is dead and searching for a body. And Redwood's quote at the time: 'she may not have left the apartment alive' (which I hope you recall). Isn't that also a giveaway?

Not to clutch at straws, but I'm hopeful that CB is a suspected accessory to concealment or disposal of the body and that the final pieces of the jigsaw are coming together. It's a possibility at least.

And I prefer this explanation to one that says the police are too stupid to get their stories straight, that MI5 couldn't make this story disappear in 13 years, that the police are being paid by the McCs or indeed any of the other conspiracy theories I've read over the years. And now the Germans are involved, how many more people must be 'in on it' to keep this huge cover-up secret? I suppose all these things are also possible, but it seems very scrappy and amateurish to be a British or EU-wide cover-up.

by Verdi Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:25 am

I don't subscribe to any theory that advocates the intricate involvement by MI5 as regards this case.

I don't think for a moment the McCanns are 'paying' the police.

I do not believe in any way shape or form that the German police hold the key to solving this case. I don't know, can't explain, why a German individual is taking centre stage. Maybe he's another Mark Williams-Thomas or Colin Sutton, in short all wind and wee-wee. Maybe he's trying to make an international name for himself or maybe this is all just a load of tabloid crap. Or maybe a combination of one or more factors.

Whatever, I remain convinced that the German prisoner is in no way connected with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. So far there is nothing to make me think otherwise.

Following this case from the beginning, there have been too many similar 'exclusives' dominating the airwaves for this to stand the test of time.

One thing I'm certain of. The McCanns escaped the intense scrutiny of the Portuguese police directly they were named arguidos at the beginning of September 2007. by fleeing Portugal for refuge back in the UK - that in itself speaks volumes to me. Since that time they have luxuriated in the knowledge that they are safe from prosecution. They have been protected by the British government, the police and the media. That must say something to even the most ardent McCann supporter.

There have been major incidents over the years that have necessitated complete establishment discretion, or concealment to put it bluntly - the missing Madeleine McCann mystery I believe to be one such case. Always such incidents encompass heinous crimes that must never be allowed to surface, involving such a wide spectrum of society that would totally destroy the establishment and the fabric of society if ever the detail came to light.

You needn't think too hard to get the idea.

Net result .... Madeleine McCann disappeared after arriving at the Ocean Club, Praia da Luz on 28th April 2007. On the surface it's not complicated - a routine police investigation would have solved the case in a matter of days/weeks/months if allowed to proceed without interference. That didn't happen - you need to ask why.

A clever operation such as this would not require the service of a German criminal, petty or otherwise. The German prisoner is yet another distraction.

Don't be distracted. Always go back to the beginning.

Keep your eye on the ball.

by Verdi Sun Jun 21, 2020 2:21 am

Put it in simple terms.

A three year old child disappears whilst on holiday with her parents and two siblings.

Praia d Luz is a fishing village, a small community on the sleepy coast of the Algarve.

It's very unlikely the McCanns or their group of friends knew anybody in the locale. Even if they did - so what?

Madeleine McCann disappeared off the face of the earth. Never seen or heard of since.

A straightforward case for routine policing.

The case was thoroughly investigated by the Portuguese police during the summer of 2007. Their investigation was seriously compromised by outside interference - the British authorities.

The case was said to be investigated by private detectives hired by the Find Madeleine Co Ltd.

The case was then referred to London's Metropolitan police, initially in 2011 to collate and review all documentation relating to the case (including private detectives) which was later upgraded to an investigation in May 2013.

Despite all this intensive investigating, thirteen years later the case has not been solved.

Why not?

The specialist dogs seconded to Portugal, alerted to the scent of cadavar and blood in locations and on items belonging to the McCanns alone, in addition to the Renault Scenic hired by the McCanns.

Is it really necessary to look for another accomplice to further complicate an otherwise straightforward case of a missing child that focuses entirely on the prime suspects - the parents. The deception aided and abetted by their holiday companions?

Keep your eye on the ball.

by Verdi Sun Jun 21, 2020 2:30 am

Meanwhile, back in the land of make believe the show goes on..

ATTACK CLAIM

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian B ‘raped’ British woman in Praia da Luz

Exclusive

Nick Pisa

20 Jun 2020, 22:40
Updated: 21 Jun 2020, 0:00

The paedophile, 43, is currently in prison in Germany after being convicted of the 2005 rape of a 72-year-old American woman in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

Court documents from that case reveal an unnamed British woman living in the area told the US victim she was also raped was by him.

The files say: “An English woman, who had obviously heard what had happened to her, also whispered to her at some point behind closed doors ‘the same thing’ had happened to her.”

The UK woman died of cancer before her claim could be investigated.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11914500/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-rape-claim-british-woman/
...................

Yeh yeh yeh, of course, what else can you expect. Another one comes out of the woodwork to feed the frenzy.

I can't even bother to paste the whole stupid article.

If you've got a case put up, otherwise stfu

.

Wake me up when it's over alarm

.

by Guest Sun Jun 21, 2020 2:48 am

One crucial lead that needs to be followed up is the DNA and hair samples extracted from the McCanns' rental car, which were found to be inconclusive or in Dr. John Lowe's words, "too complex for meaningful interpretation".

https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm

Instead, these supposedly competent three police forces are wandering around, looking for imaginary abductors.

It's like looking for a murderer when you stumble upon a dead body, before you even examine it. For all you know, the victim could have died of natural causes, but it doesn't matter because person X over there made two phone calls an hour before the murder, so he/she is clearly guilty.

by **PeterMac** Sun Jun 21, 2020 7:19 am

"Despite all this intensive investigating, thirteen years later the case has not been solved."

It has not only not been solved.
It goes deeper that that.
Thirteen years later there still isn't a credible case.

As we keep repeating, until you have a case – in other words you know what happened – you can't even start trying to solve it.
You can't solve a problem you can't define.
Grange and the BKA don't know what they are supposed to be 'solving'.
The PJ worked it out in the first hours.

by **Hobs** Sun Jun 21, 2020 12:59 pm

I was reading the news article on the Sky News website about

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian B's name wasn't on list because of 'court blunder'

https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-bs-name-wasnt-on-list-because-of-court-blunder-12010968

They had an interesting photo of Maddie and something caught my eye about her eyes, in particular her left eye.

The latest McCann suspect: Scotland Yard has revealed vital new information about a suspect wanted in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. - Page 2 Maddie10

The reflection in her left eye is white where I would expect to see some red.
If you look at her right eye there is a hint of red eye.
Is it just me or could there have been something wrong with her left eye causing the white reflection in the pupil?
I know there are several causes of this, and the most common one is simply a light shining off the optic nerve.
This happens when light entering the eye at a certain angle is reflected, causing a white eye effect and is totally harmless, however given Maddie's history with her coloboma in her right eye, initially described as obvious and a great way to identify her and used in advertising later minimized to just a small fleck in her eye and not something they had 'promoted' it could be something worth noting.

However, the white reflex could be a sign of something more serious including, occasionally, retinoblastoma, a rare form of eye cancer that affects babies and young children mainly under the age of six.

It’s very important to remember that retinoblastoma is rare and only affects around 50 children a year in the UK. There are other, much more likely causes of this white eye effect.

However, we urge parents who have seen the white reflex in their child’s eyes to get it checked out as soon as possible just to rule out anything serious.

by cookiemuncher Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:28 pm

Hobs wrote:I was reading the news article on the Sky News website about

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian B's name wasn't on list because of 'court blunder'

https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-bs-name-wasnt-on-list-because-of-court-blunder-12010968

They had an interesting photo of Maddie and something caught my eye about her eyes, in particular her left eye.

The reflection in her left eye is white where I would expect to see some red.
If you look at her right eye there is a hint of red eye.
Is it just me or could there have been something wrong with her left eye causing the white reflection in the pupil?
I know there are several causes of this, and the most common one is simply a light shining off the optic nerve.
This happens when light entering the eye at a certain angle is reflected, causing a white eye effect and is totally harmless, however given Maddie's history with her coloboma in her right eye, initially described as obvious and a great way to identify her and used in advertising later minimized to just a small fleck in her eye and not something they had 'promoted' it could be something worth noting.

However, the white reflex could be a sign of something more serious including, occasionally, retinoblastoma, a rare form of eye cancer that affects babies and young children mainly under the age of six.

It’s very important to remember that retinoblastoma is rare and only affects around 50 children a year in the UK. There are other, much more likely causes of this white eye effect.

However, we urge parents who have seen the white reflex in their child’s eyes to get it checked out as soon as possible just to rule out anything serious.

Yes, it's very telling. There have been a number of cases where children have had a photo taken and a defect in their eye has been seen and the parents advised to get medical help to check it out.

I remember a story going back some years that a doctor was queue-ing up in a supermarket to pay for his groceries and he got talking to the man in front of him. He noticed that the man had a defect in his eye (I can't remember what it was now) but he told him he should get it checked out, which the man did and it was a form of cancer, I think. He later praised the doctor and said if it wasn't for him seeing it he would be dead without having the appropriate treatment.

I think Madeleine had a lot of medical problems which have been covered up, hence her medical records not being made available to the PJ.

by **Jill Havern** Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:48 pm

At least her genitals were perfect, according to Kate in her bewk.

by cookiemuncher Sun Jun 21, 2020 1:56 pm

Jill Havern wrote:At least her genitals were perfect, according to Kate in her bewk.

After I posted my previous comment I remembered from a long time ago, probably 8 or 9 years ago or more, that there was a photo of Madeleine on the internet, she must have been about 2 years old, standing on a beach in a red swimming costume holding a bucket and spade and it looked like she had a stoma (colostomy) bag under her swimming costume on her stomach next to her belly button.

A number of people on different forums commented on it as to what the bulge was, but it all petered out when some of the forums got closed down, never to be mentioned again.

(Jill, if this isn't appropriate please delete it.)

by **Jill Havern** Sun Jun 21, 2020 2:04 pm

I don't think we need to go into this though because other photos of her look normal enough.

by Eastree27 Sun Jun 21, 2020 3:40 pm

Verdi wrote:Meanwhile, back in the land of make believe the show goes on..

ATTACK CLAIM

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian B ‘raped’ British woman in Praia da Luz

Exclusive

Nick Pisa

20 Jun 2020, 22:40
Updated: 21 Jun 2020, 0:00

The paedophile, 43, is currently in prison in Germany after being convicted of the 2005 rape of a 72-year-old American woman in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

Court documents from that case reveal an unnamed British woman living in the area told the US victim she was also raped was by him.

The files say: “An English woman, who had obviously heard what had happened to her, also whispered to her at some point behind closed doors ‘the same thing’ had happened to her.”

The UK woman died of cancer before her claim could be investigated.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11914500/madeleine-mccann-christian-b-rape-claim-british-woman/
...................

Yeh yeh yeh, of course, what else can you expect. Another one comes out of the woodwork to feed the frenzy.

I can't even bother to paste the whole stupid article.

If you've got a case put up, otherwise .

Wake me up when it's over .

That element is likely to be truthful - if he raped one older woman then him raping another older women is not unlikely. Being it is in court documents and she is dead it feels to me like that element is true.

by Doug D Sun Jun 21, 2020 4:39 pm

Just picked this up on the Controversy FB site.
I assume it's to do with all this latest nonsense:

Hopefully our Portuguese speaking friends will report back.

by sandancer Sun Jun 21, 2020 4:40 pm

Jill Havern wrote:

I don't think we need to go into this though because other photos of her look normal enough.

This is perfectly normal posture for a toddler . Slightly protruding abdomen , lower back curve . Our centre of gravity sits just below the navel at this age just out of baby stage toddlers are still " finding their feet " balance and coordination .
Please let's not go down the MSM route .
No offence , cookiemuncher singlerose

by Doug D Sun Jun 21, 2020 4:53 pm

Textusa has just published Sandra Felgueiras interview with Christian Wolter from 19^th June.

Sandra addresses him in English, so it is a transcription, and his replies have been translated by Joana Morais.

http://textusa.blogspot.com/2020/06/christian-wolter-sexta-as-9-june-19-2007.html

by cookiemuncher Sun Jun 21, 2020 5:21 pm

Doug D wrote:Textusa has just published Sandra Felgueiras interview with Christian Wolter from 19^th June.

Sandra addresses him in English, so it is a transcription, and his replies have been translated by Joana Morais.

http://textusa.blogspot.com/2020/06/christian-wolter-sexta-as-9-june-19-2007.htm

I've skim read the article but I see no mention of Eddie and Keela. It is mentioned that "Madeleine is dead" but as it takes about an hour for cadaver odour to form it means that this "suspect" must have hung around for about an hour before taking away Madeleine's body, or am I missing something? I know I'm "thick" sometimes but why does everybody deliberately ignore the findings of Eddie and Keela, the same as they ignore the findings of the PJ as if they never investigated?

Is everyone afraid of Eddie and Keela's findings as they are frightened of the findings of the PJ and hope they will all disappear into oblivion if they're never mentioned again.

by Rogue-a-Tory Sun Jun 21, 2020 8:24 pm

cookiemuncher wrote:
Hobs wrote:I was reading the news article on the Sky News website about

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian B's name wasn't on list because of 'court blunder'

https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-bs-name-wasnt-on-list-because-of-court-blunder-12010968

They had an interesting photo of Maddie and something caught my eye about her eyes, in particular her left eye.

The reflection in her left eye is white where I would expect to see some red.
If you look at her right eye there is a hint of red eye.
Is it just me or could there have been something wrong with her left eye causing the white reflection in the pupil?
I know there are several causes of this, and the most common one is simply a light shining off the optic nerve.
This happens when light entering the eye at a certain angle is reflected, causing a white eye effect and is totally harmless, however given Maddie's history with her coloboma in her right eye, initially described as obvious and a great way to identify her and used in advertising later minimized to just a small fleck in her eye and not something they had 'promoted' it could be something worth noting.

However, the white reflex could be a sign of something more serious including, occasionally, retinoblastoma, a rare form of eye cancer that affects babies and young children mainly under the age of six.

It’s very important to remember that retinoblastoma is rare and only affects around 50 children a year in the UK. There are other, much more likely causes of this white eye effect.

However, we urge parents who have seen the white reflex in their child’s eyes to get it checked out as soon as possible just to rule out anything serious.
Yes, it's very telling. There have been a number of cases where children have had a photo taken and a defect in their eye has been seen and the parents advised to get medical help to check it out.

I remember a story going back some years that a doctor was queue-ing up in a supermarket to pay for his groceries and he got talking to the man in front of him. He noticed that the man had a defect in his eye (I can't remember what it was now) but he told him he should get it checked out, which the man did and it was a form of cancer, I think. He later praised the doctor and said if it wasn't for him seeing it he would be dead without having the appropriate treatment.

I think Madeleine had a lot of medical problems which have been covered up, hence her medical records not being made available to the PJ.

I believe there is a simple explanation given it's a photo 2006 or 2007. They've used a free/cheap photo editor to clumsily remove red eye.

by cookiemuncher Sun Jun 21, 2020 9:14 pm

Rogue-a-Tory wrote:
cookiemuncher wrote:
Hobs wrote:I was reading the news article on the Sky News website about

Madeleine McCann suspect Christian B's name wasn't on list because of 'court blunder'

https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccann-suspect-christian-bs-name-wasnt-on-list-because-of-court-blunder-12010968

They had an interesting photo of Maddie and something caught my eye about her eyes, in particular her left eye.

The reflection in her left eye is white where I would expect to see some red.
If you look at her right eye there is a hint of red eye.
Is it just me or could there have been something wrong with her left eye causing the white reflection in the pupil?
I know there are several causes of this, and the most common one is simply a light shining off the optic nerve.
This happens when light entering the eye at a certain angle is reflected, causing a white eye effect and is totally harmless, however given Maddie's history with her coloboma in her right eye, initially described as obvious and a great way to identify her and used in advertising later minimized to just a small fleck in her eye and not something they had 'promoted' it could be something worth noting.

However, the white reflex could be a sign of something more serious including, occasionally, retinoblastoma, a rare form of eye cancer that affects babies and young children mainly under the age of six.

It’s very important to remember that retinoblastoma is rare and only affects around 50 children a year in the UK. There are other, much more likely causes of this white eye effect.

However, we urge parents who have seen the white reflex in their child’s eyes to get it checked out as soon as possible just to rule out anything serious.
Yes, it's very telling. There have been a number of cases where children have had a photo taken and a defect in their eye has been seen and the parents advised to get medical help to check it out.

I remember a story going back some years that a doctor was queue-ing up in a supermarket to pay for his groceries and he got talking to the man in front of him. He noticed that the man had a defect in his eye (I can't remember what it was now) but he told him he should get it checked out, which the man did and it was a form of cancer, I think. He later praised the doctor and said if it wasn't for him seeing it he would be dead without having the appropriate treatment.

I think Madeleine had a lot of medical problems which have been covered up, hence her medical records not being made available to the PJ.
I believe there is a simple explanation given it's a photo 2006 or 2007. They've

used a free/cheap photo editor to clumsily remove red eye.

Why bother, her right eye looks "red". Perhaps they didn't know that particular photo was going to be released into the public domain, the same as they don't know a lot about their own daughter when Kate McCann was asked the 48 questions, one of them being "were you thinking of giving Madeleine to a family member to bring up", which was one of the many questions she refused to answer...

Log in for more topics