Would this account for the unprecedented high level of political support?

".......buying a book does not give us the power to "know" the truth, as if it was a chip that is implanted in us,...."

A Estrela de Madeleine
by Paulo Pereira Cristovão,

Tony Bennett wrote:

Stella wrote:Thanks to the Portuguese Police and the release of the guest lists, we have now come to piece together, that one of the people socialising with Kate and Gerry McCann that week, is very closely related to the Right Honourable Margaret Hodge MBE, MP.

REST SNIPPED

I think it's important for this discussion that we now identify the person closely related to Margaret ('Lady') Hodge who was at Praia da Luz with the McCanns that week, for his name is publicly available in the files: Mr Philip Martin Edmonds. He is Margaret Hodge's nephew.

Mr Edwards has a fascinating family history. Born on 31 August 1962 according to his entry on Geni.Com, he married Reina Hazenberg and they have three boys, all of whom were out with Philip in Praia da Luz for the week the McCanns were there. But not his wife Reina, so it seems. We also know from the Portuguese Police files that he mysteriously jetted off to Switzerland, where he lives, early on Friday morning (4 May 2011), apparnetly cutting short his holiday just as news was surfacing that a child had been abducted from Praia da Luz.

Visit the website of Stemcor.com, the world's largest steel company, with a turnover measured in billions, and Philip Edmonds' name again comes up as one of their 11-strong Board of Directors.

How did Philip Edmonds get so far? A clue is apparent from the same Stemcor.com website: Philips' Uncle Ralph - Ralph Oppenheimer - is also on the Stemcor Board.

Indeed, Stemcor, as a brief internet search reveals, is an Oppenheimer family business.

All this has come about because Philip's father, Herbert Edmonds, made a wise choice in marrying into the Oppenheimer family.

Hannah Oppenheimer was the eldest of five children of Hans Oppenheimer and his wife Lisbeth Hollitscher, an Austrian Jewess. Hans was born in Stuttgart, Germany but fled to Alexandria in the mid-1930s as Hitler's anti-Semitic Nazi regime was stepping up its persecution of Jews, in the lead-up to World War II.

His first four children, including Hannah, and of course her sister Margaret Eve Hodge, nee Oppenheimer, were all born in Alexandria, Egypt, Hodge being born on 8 September 1944 in Alexandria, Hannah three years later in Orpington, Kent. Hannah still lives in Kent (see below).

In the 1980s, Margaret Hodge did two things that made her famous (or infamous). She married Sir Henry Hodge (her second marriage), and became known as Margaret Hodge. And she became a prominent Labour Councillor in left-wing Islington, where she was later notorious for covering up extensive child abuse in what became known as the 'Islington Children's Home Scandal', fully exposed in the 1990s (there's a lot about this on the internet).

In 2003, despite this appalling record, Prime Minister Tony Blair made her Britain's first-ever 'Minister for Children' (!)

Lady Hodge inherited a substantial slice of the Oppenheimer fortune, and is one of Britain's wealthiest women; despite that, she claimed excessive Parliamentary expenses from us, the British taxpayers (see reports on the MPs' expenses scandal).

Philip's father and mother, Herbert and Hannah Edmonds, aged 81 and 74 resepctively, live in Bromley, Kent. Philip is beleived to be based in Switzerland.

Hannah Oppenheimer's father Hans was the son of Salomon Oppenheimer, born 1871 in Ohringen, west Germany, and in turn Salomon is the son of Abraham Oppenheimer, who in turn was the son of another Abraham Oppenheimer, from one of the many branches of this powerful German-Hewish family.

Edmonds is not an English name, it's an anglicised version of the German 'Emsheimer'. Philip Edmonds' father, Herbert Emsheimer, was born in Karlsruhe, wast Germany, in 1930, and the family changed their name to Edmonds on arriving in England.

Why Philip Edmonds should choose Praia da Luz as his choice of holiday venue for the week 28 April to 5 May 2007 is not known. And there is no explanation as to why Edmonds and his three sons jetted away from Praia da Luz on the morning of Friday 4 May 2007, just as the British public were tuning in to the news and learning that a British girl had been mysteriously abducted.

I wrote to Mr Edmonds recently about some of these matters and received this courteous but brief reply:


Dear Mr Bennett,

I am in receipt of your letter of 22 July regarding Madeleine McCann. I am sure you would appreciate that it would not be appropriate for me to comment too much, as we do not know each other, and I have no idea what your connection to the case is. However, I would also not want further conspiracy theories to fester by simply ignoring your letter.

Therefore, I can confirm that whatever information I had (including some photos of my sons taken on the day Madeleine disappeared, which showed her in the background) was passed both to the police and to the McCanns at the time. Having been in Portugal at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance and seen all of the events first hand, there is not one shred of doubt in my mind that the events as reported were correct.

In fact one of the most terrible parts of this tragedy is that there are people out there who are questioning this, just adding further to the nightmare that the McCann family have suffered. I cannot imagine anything crueller.


I’m afraid I won’t enter into further correspondence on this matter with you.

Yours sincerely,

Philip Edmonds

Having seen all of the events first hand?

  

The flying out early may not be relevant if that was pre-booked according to his plans.
Mark Warner Arrivals sheet shows he flew in from Gatwick but:

‘Client resides in Switzerland and will most likely not be taking our return flight. He will let management know upon arrival.’

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

or he could have done a quick runner, not wishing to get involved or be identified by the gathering press.

However, boys 6,7,8,
‘Childcare reserved for all three children. Verified by Emma’
Why were three boys of that age apparently taken out of school (or not if boarding/private school with longer holidays week before Whitsun?) & dumped in childcare for the week. It doesn’t look as if he should have been concerned about the price for a ‘cheap’ week. Was it a good ‘activity holiday’ for the boys for the week?
Why was he actually there?
Why would he use such a facility? He only booked a two bed apartment, so its not as if he had a luxury penthouse apartment or something at the place.

Surely these should be easy questions with easy answers for PJ or SY with no obvious reasons not to answer.
If not why not?

Repeat: Edmonds affirms he has seen the events at first hand

Which events could those have been?

No wonder he's keeping his mouth shut then!

I am becoming more and more cynical about just what was going on at that MW complex that particular week, and why all these well-to-do people were attracted to the 'event', if there was one. It is very, very strange indeed that a man with the wealth of Edmonds chooses to go there. It's like Richard Branson booking a room in a Campanile. DP organized the holiday, didn't he?

Dee Coy wrote:I am becoming more and more cynical about just what was going on at that MW complex that particular week, and why all these well-to-do people were attracted to the 'event', if there was one. It is very, very strange indeed that a man with the wealth of Edmonds chooses to go there. It's like Richard Branson booking a room in a Campanile. DP organized the holiday, didn't he?

MW Holidays may well have another function than just providing relaxation.

Have you looked at the company's history? [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]. How common is that? The big successful dotcoms spent up to 90% of their venture capital on advertising while building up their recognition and not making any profits, but that only went on for a few years, not 16.

I smell spookery.

Is there confirmation that the boys seen with Edmonds were actually his sons?
How old were they? A poster has said that the boys were 6 7 8- I think- or ages close like this, seem strange if true that Edmonds would have three children with only a year in between each child.

Hicks wrote:Is there confirmation that the boys seen with Edmonds were actually his sons?
How old were they? A poster has said that the boys were 6 7 8- I think- or ages close like this, seem strange if true that Edmonds would have three children with only a year in between each child.

***
If they're all boys, it's not that strange ...   

Something is definitely wrong here, Mr Phillip Edmonds claims he handed over a photo he took of his sons, with Madeleine in the background, but more importantly, the very day she went missing. According to RO Madeleine was definitely not around that day. How come we have not seen this all important photo of M? Was it taken after or before the pool photo? After or before the tennis photo?

I rather suspect that, if this photo ever existed, it's likely to be a grainy image of a child who could be any of the little blonde girls who were in PDL that week.

I certainly don't see anything unusual in the ages of the Edmonds children - just thankful though that I didn't have 3 in 2 years!

Hicks wrote:Something is definitely wrong here, Mr Phillip Edmonds claims he handed over a photo he took of his sons, with Madeleine in the background, but more importantly, the very day she went missing. According to RO Madeleine was definitely not around that day. How come we have not seen this all important photo of M? Was it taken after or before the pool photo? After or before the tennis photo?

If looked at separately that schoolboy type letter of support and the one photograph (why not more? Holiday, snaps, digital,one?)  are strange but as time went on and the press still able to print  what they liked, other helpful people came out of the woodwork. E.g. Weinberger who remembered a shady character.  
So it looks to me that  these  certificates of the truth according to TM were produced as and when needed.

Another point: holiday snaps were 'requested' from all the guests - now allegedly Maddie went with the creche to the beach, went swimming, played tennis, went on a boat and not a single parent snapped her together or in the background with their own children?
I would certainly want a picture of my toddler in a lifejacket for the first time in a boat. In fact I wouldn't have trusted  any nanny to keep her safe - I would have to be there.
The group was small, only seven or so in the Lobsters, so where are the pictures?  It seems the only one was Edmunds' boys with Maddie in the bacground ( how far?) who imo wasn't there. Nice touch to have this other proof for that important date.

Eta: busy day the 3rd, Maddie changing clothes three times at least. Not including those pyjamas.

KM already got her retaliation in about lack of photos from other parent's etc in the bewk on P. 64 where she talks about another guest filming his own daughter with a video camera feeling like a dirty old man, paedophiles, paranoia, not being able to take photos of your own kids in swimming pools etc.to cover this scenario.

I remember a big discussion on the UK daytime telly sofas introducing a new wristband/detector to stick on your childrens' wrists/ankles when you go on holiday so you don't lose them on the beach.

Scaremongering with an agenda was my first reaction.

tigger wrote:

Hicks wrote:Something is definitely wrong here, Mr Phillip Edmonds claims he handed over a photo he took of his sons, with Madeleine in the background, but more importantly, the very day she went missing. According to RO Madeleine was definitely not around that day. How come we have not seen this all important photo of M? Was it taken after or before the pool photo? After or before the tennis photo?

If looked at separately that schoolboy type letter of support and the one photograph (why not more? Holiday, snaps, digital,one?)  are strange but as time went on and the press still able to print  what they liked, other helpful people came out of the woodwork. E.g. Weinberger who remembered a shady character.  
So it looks to me that  these  certificates of the truth according to TM were produced as and when needed.

Another point: holiday snaps were 'requested' from all the guests - now allegedly Maddie went with the creche to the beach, went swimming, played tennis, went on a boat and not a single parent snapped her together or in the background with their own children?
I would certainly want a picture of my toddler in a lifejacket for the first time in a boat. In fact I wouldn't have trusted  any nanny to keep her safe - I would have to be there.
The group was small, only seven or so in the Lobsters, so where are the pictures?  It seems the only one was Edmunds' boys with Maddie in the bacground ( how far?) who imo wasn't there. Nice touch to have this other proof for that important date.

Eta: busy day the 3rd, Maddie changing clothes three times at least. Not including those pyjamas.

I agree tigger.  Also you have to ask yourself WHY Edmonds would feel the need to give support (lie) for the McCann's who, after all, were strangers to him.......weren't they? 
strangers ?

Hicks wrote:Is there confirmation that the boys seen with Edmonds were actually his sons?
How old were they? A poster has said that the boys were 6 7 8- I think- or ages close like this, seem strange if true that Edmonds would have three children with only a year in between each child.

They are his sons.  I won`t name them, even though they are listed in the BMD index.  First one born Sept 1998 in Westminster,  second one born November 1999 Westminster, third one born January 2001 Southwark.

I had 3 sons in 14 months. !!

Remember a lot of holiday makers probably sent their snaps direct to the McCanns, even Philip Edmonds says he did.  Didn`t the McCanns ask everyone to send their snaps to them quite early on?

Woofer wrote:Remember a lot of holiday makers probably sent their snaps direct to the McCanns, even Philip Edmonds says he did.  Didn`t the McCanns ask everyone to send their snaps to them quite early on?

***
And to CEOPS. But I cannot remember any update from them ...

Woofer wrote:

Hicks wrote:Is there confirmation that the boys seen with Edmonds were actually his sons?
How old were they? A poster has said that the boys were 6 7 8- I think- or ages close like this, seem strange if true that Edmonds would have three children with only a year in between each child.

They are his sons.  I won`t name them, even though they are listed in the BMD index.  First one born Sept 1998 in Westminster,  second one born November 1999 Westminster, third one born January 2001 Southwark.

I had 3 sons in 14 months. !!

Woofer - 3 sons in 14 months.  That's plausible with different mothers.  Is that how you managed it?  

Or... twins?

Ladyinred wrote:

Woofer wrote:

Hicks wrote:Is there confirmation that the boys seen with Edmonds were actually his sons?
How old were they? A poster has said that the boys were 6 7 8- I think- or ages close like this, seem strange if true that Edmonds would have three children with only a year in between each child.

They are his sons.  I won`t name them, even though they are listed in the BMD index.  First one born Sept 1998 in Westminster,  second one born November 1999 Westminster, third one born January 2001 Southwark.

I had 3 sons in 14 months. !!

Woofer - 3 sons in 14 months.  That's plausible with different mothers.  Is that how you managed it?  

Or... twins?

One, then twins.         .........    

There are no twins here though as the ages are 6,7,8.

Hicks wrote:There are no twins here though as the ages are 6,7,8.

I have three in three years..  All singles, but a also a set of what they call "irish twins" born 50 weeks apart.

Again: if they're all boys, there's no mystery about it ...   

sami wrote:

Hicks wrote:There are no twins here though as the ages are 6,7,8.

I have three in three years..  All singles, but a also a set of what they call "irish twins" born 50 weeks apart.

Brave. Very brave.   

tigger wrote:I'm quite convinced it was to get on the microchip bandwagon, but also sure that it wasn't a fake abduction or abduction organised for that purpose.
It was simply so badly done - the evidence of abduction so totally missing, that it bears all the hallmarks of someone who thinks he's clever and regards foreigners and simple folk like us as inferior and gullible. 

Well I must admit that a government scam to promote microchipping features on my list of explanations for the Madeleine mystery, but unlike you I think that a badly-done, obviously faked abduction  fits into that scenario very well.
 
Bear in mind that if the government are using Madeleine’s plight to get the public to accept the idea of microchipping, then it would be most important for them to hold the public’s interest  in her story over a long time.

If they had presented the scenario of a ‘professional’ ie believable abduction and if it had been impossible to see the McCanns as anything other than victims, I think the public would have eventually lost interest…that is human nature. 
The same way that a soap opera wouldn’t get very far if all the characters were trustworthy and likeable.

But if they keep changing the storyline and adding all sorts of new twists to the plot  and throwing loads of confusion and discrepancies into the mix as well,  that will keep the interest of the public…just as all the little sub-plots in a soap opera do.

If it is a scam then I think the ending will be unexpected and spectacular in true soap-opera style...I also think it will be fairly credible, thus making it impossible to know whether it is real or not.

Cheshire Cat wrote:

Stella wrote:

Cheshire Cat wrote:
The presence of Weinberger suggests to me that the meeting was not to resurrect the Pathways bid but rather to discuss an innovative product and the launching of a company.

You could be right Cheshire Cat.

This was something I posted on the other OC Guests thread and may be relevant to this discussion:

I have read up on the failed Pathways bid and I feel doubtful that this was the reason for the Doctors, experts and business people to have gathered at the Ocean Club at the end of April 2007.
For me, the characters present and the curtain of secrecy indicate that an important meeting was indeed scheduled for that fateful week but I am inclined to believe it was to discuss some other commercial venture. Here is one suggestion:

Paul Weinberger was present at the Ocean Club and he was at the time Director of Clinical Development at Enigma Diagnostics. Enigma has an exclusive licence from the Defence Science Technology Laboratory to manage a portfolio of patents which represent over 15 years of UK Ministry of Defence funded research.

Paul Weinberger has been involved in many projects and the RANGER project is detailed below. It was submitted to the EC in April 2007. The RANGER consortium also included the Health Protection Agency [Note: COMARE is part of HPA].

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

The EC issued the following Call under the Health priority in 2007: “HEALTH-2007-2.3.3-4: Innovative point-of-care diagnostic tests for influenza. The objective is to develop and validate affordable, reliable, and rapid diagnostic tests for influenza infections with designated viruses. Research outcomes should be applicable to surveillance and early detection of an epidemic outbreak and suitable for point-of-care use in both developed and developing countries, addressing early biological markers and/or late surveillance.”

Enigma [lead partner and coordinators] decided to submit a proposal to the specified EC call as it provided an opportunity to fund the development of a clinical diagnostic system to complement its existing defence sector system. The project was called Ranger (“Rapid, robust and scalable platform technology for fully automated reference laboratory grade Polymerase Chain Reaction (PCR) based diagnostics regardless of global setting”) and was submitted to the EC in April 2007. The project was accepted for funding and received a grant of €3 million against a total project plan of €4.1 million and 24 month duration. The project started in January 2008.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

PRESS RELEASE

3, October 2007
ENIGMA DIAGNOSTICS ANNOUNCES A EUROPEAN COMMISSION AWARD
OF €3MILLION TO FUND THE DEVELOPMENT OF A POINT OF CARE
PLATFORM FOR THE RAPID DIAGNOSIS OF INFLUENZA INFECTIONS
A fully automated, portable solution for in-clinic and out-reach influenza testing
Porton Down, UK, Enigma Diagnostics, the life sciences company developing rapid
molecular diagnostics and detection systems, announces a €3 million award from the
European Commission Framework 7 programme to the RANGER consortium. The
award will fund the development and validation of a fully automated, low cost system for
the rapid diagnosis of influenza infections and subtypes.
The RANGER consortium, which is coordinated by Enigma Diagnostics, comprises
leading technology companies including Applied Biosystems, Sagentia, Tico Europe,
Bruhn Newtech Group, Bioplastics BV and PERA who will contribute to the development
of the instrument and assays. The consortium also includes the Health Protection
Agency, the UK’s national reference laboratory for influenza diagnostics, and the Queen
Sirikit National Institute of Child Health who will evaluate and validate the system.
The system will be based on Enigma’s proprietary and fully-automated instrumentation
technology, which integrates sample preparation with real-time polymerase chain
reaction (PCR) to detect viral RNA in a full range of clinical samples. The simple-to-use,
portable system will provide rapid results direct to medical staff in a near-patient or outreach
environment in both the developed and developing world.
By providing laboratory standard, high specificity and sensitivity PCR results in a
decentralised setting, the system will advance the diagnosis of early stage viral
infections and the surveillance of disease outbreaks.
Enigma is also separately developing real-time PCR-based diagnostics systems
targeting chlamydia, gonorrhoea and other sexually transmitted infections.
John McKinley, Chairman of Enigma Diagnostics, said: “The award of this grant and the
strength of our consortium partners is a great endorsement of Enigma’s technology. It is
also a strategically important milestone for the company as it demonstrates the utility of
our real time PCR in what is an extremely challenging area of diagnosis. We are
confident we will be able to deliver a system that rapidly and simply delivers laboratory
quality results at the point of care”
-ENDS

A UK based SME called Enigma Diagnostics was an innovative start-up company operating out of the UK Government defence research centre DSTL at Porton Down, Salisbury, UK. Enigma is a recognised leader in developing rapid diagnostics for the detection and identification of infectious organisms, such as bacteria and viruses, in environmental, clinical, and biological samples. The basis of its technology is an automated platform for PCR diagnostics, at present focused on the defence sector.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Paul Weinberger : Director

ENIGMA DIAGNOSTICS LTD
Building 224 Tetricus Science Park
Dstl Porton Down
Salisbury
Wiltshire
SP4 0JQ
Tel: +44 01980 590131

The vaccine industry is big business. Flu vaccines are heavily promoted, despite some doctors and scientists believing that they don't work properly if at all. And there is the possibility of an adverse reaction. The Labour Government under Blair heavily pushed the MMR vaccine. Those who raised questions about vaccine safety, for instance Dr Andrew Wakefield, were dealt with in no uncertain terms. Any suggestion of adverse reactions after vaccines, sudden infant death for instance or autism or other auto-immune disease for instance was silenced. The British press gave a lot of credence to reports from our health authorities. and Andrew Wakefield was struck off. At around this period (eg: 2007) the MMR thing was a hot potato. Brian Deer writing for the Sunday Times and also for the doctor's newspaper BMJ was involved in a sustained campaign again Wakefield which led to him being called 'discredited'. 

Thought there had to be a drug issue behind all this! And medical negligence issues. In more ways than one.....

Guest wrote:We are currently having a count up and to date have identified 11 Doctors staying at the OC that week.

11  

Oh the bitter irony of it all!  How many doctors does it take to resuscitate a sedated child, a purely hypothetical question, obviously!

tigger wrote:jd wrote:
All the meetings they had, people who got involved from the outset, and the visits that gerry mccann made at this time suggest strongly this was the case. This imo was what the mccanns accepted as their part from the Symingtons/OC. And looking at gerry mccann laughing like he had won the lottery within 3 and 9 days shows he was easily persuaded! This also shows why he always this big smirk, he knows the powers behind the scenes would always protect the scam, they had to despite what they really thought of the mccanns.
unquote

I suddenly thought: 'That's it, he pulled a fast one and it came off, just - but it came off!' It is so in character!

Yes - that huge smirking grin. As he stood by the patio doors of an apartment not long after Madeleine 'disappeared' - a big wide smile like that as though he had won the jackpot. As he came out of the church on what would have been Madeleine's fourth birthday - another huge grin. Those were genuine smiles - with a wide mouth.

What planet are some people on? Oh, I know.....follow the money folks. 

Plus those inappropriate little smirks when interviewed

Guest wrote:

Cheshire Cat wrote:
Stainless steel is used to manufacture medical and surgical equipment. itanium is used to manufacture light weight but tough medical products such as implants. If an innovative and important project was being discussed that required steel in the manufacturing process then perhaps Edmonds would be in a attendance? Zug, Switzerland is Stentors European hub for stainless steel.

Anytime there is a health scare like swine flu, everyone is encouraged to go and get a vaccination. All of these injections must have stainless steel needles and as vaccinations are the way ahead, I think you might be onto something here Cheshire Cat.

Yes - excellent point! Think of all the health scares which the media whipped up into a frenzy - swine flu is a good example. The Health Protection Agency advise everyone to go and get a vaccine otherwise we are all going to die from swine flu and so on. Massive stocks of drugs are manufactured which, in the case of swine flu, for instance, get stockpiled as, surprise, surprise the 'killer epidemic' is not quite as 'killer' or 'epidemic' as the health 'experts' and media had claimed. Still, it was a nice little earner while it lasted.

The media loves a good old health scare. It sells newspapers and taps into a national neurosis. Whipping everyone up into a fever of anxiety about some new and deadly virus or bacteria is good for business all round and also serves to keep the general public in their place - anxious that they are about to succumb to the latest killer virus.

Now, if you look at the 'disappearance' of Madeleine McCann through the lens of the latest scare, you can see that it taps into the  big bad bogey-man scare. The big bad bogey-man who is going to creep into your child's bedroom and steal you sleeping child.  If it happened to the McCanns, it could happen to anyone! Too bad it was in Portugal where the police are like Tweedledum and Tweedledee though.

Throughout her book, Kate continuously makes references to Madeleine being 'stolen' from her bed by an unknown abductor or 'being taken' as though she is a character in some ghoulish fairy tale. The big bad wolf and red riding hood. 

So, this is the child abduction scare....as others have noted, perhaps to pave the way for microchipping or other surveillance devices. A bit like the latest 'must have' vaccine or drug - a device guaranteed to keep your child safe and sound from a nasty random abductor! Buy one, get one free, available in sizes 0 - 20 (gap year specials!) Once fitted, you have a 100% money-back guarantee that if your child is unlucky enough to be abducted, s/he will be found - dead or alive. That's our promise to you!

Gee, thanks - do you do them for adults too?  

So you can see why the media liked the abduction story. And if the 'wider agenda' relates to some kind of surveillance device or increased data-bases and further intrusion into an individual's privacy, then that might explain the political enthusiasm for the McCanns in the early days (plus it was a massive human interest story that would cover up all sorts of other things that were going on). And other vested interests might gain to benefit from encouraging a collective paranoia about health and safety and increased surveillance etc.

Kate throws herself into the cause of 'missing children' with the indignant fervour of a woman scorned.

As she explains on page 365: 'It is simply unacceptable that the authorities could decide no more can be done to find Madeleine when no comprehensive review of the case has been undertaken.'

Chutzpah is the word that springs to mind here.

On page 291,  'Until Madeleine was taken, I'd been aware of only a few child abduction and murder cases......As we learned more and discovered the massive scale of the problem, we were appalled. Sickened and perplexed at first by how little I had known, I was only now beginning to realize that such ignorance was widespread. In general these crimes are so poorly publicized, probably because they are so low on the political agenda of too many countries, that public awareness, too is low. 

Well, Kate certainly changed all that. Although what good it has done Madeleine, or any other missing child, is a moot point.

She then goes on to write about the AMBER alert system in the US and her frustration at there not being a similar system in Europe. On page 295 she calls out for DNA testing of everyone who was in Praia da Luz and subsequent testing of people in the area. 

She also writes about her lobbying of all MEPs to sign a declaration to help establish a coordinated CRA. 

Then, on page 366, she writes that in November 2010 'we started a petition to lobby the two governments to conduct an independent review.'

Holy guacamole, what next?! A world-wide investigation and review of the case, with unlimited funding, underwritten by the Pope and Bill Gates?


Still, as Kate writes at the end of her book: 'It is never too late to do the right thing.'

Indeed.

As always, I find myself morbidly fascinated by the minutiae of Kate's book. The closing words are as illuminating, in their own way, as the opening words.

After being extolled to 'do the right thing', we are asked to contact the Madeleine Fund and contact details are given. 

Two further sentences conclude the main body of the book: 

'Alternatively, speak to a religious leader in your community.
Thank you for not giving up on Madeleine'.

A religious leader, eh? Many people these days are not religious. I presume Kate is aware of this. Still, I suppose if you are a member of the Catholic religion, as Kate is, your secrets will be safe with the priest!