If the Scotland Yard Review is Legitimate, Then the McCanns are Likely Innocent

Columbo wrote:

Realist wrote:

whodunit wrote:

Somebody had to 'see' MBM on the night besides the McCanns.

But they already had an independent witness in the form of Cat Baker an hour previously. Whether one is of the opinion that she is an honest or dishonest witness is immaterial. Why would the McCanns require further confirmation she was alive at around that time.?

And then we have MO who checked the room during the evening, only he didn't actually "check" anything... let alone see MBM.

Can someone please remind me if anyone else apart from MO claimed - in a written statement - to have even been to Apt 5A during the alleged "regular checks" on 3 May? (Aside from KM and GM)

MayMuse wrote:

whodunit wrote:@Columbo---"Where both parties do agree is that there was a visit. If it didn't happen at all, there must be a reason for its subsequent creation."

Somebody had to 'see' MBM on the night besides the McCanns.

The "visit" we have to take DP & KM word; although it was not in KM's original statement? ( unable to remember if it was in DP's) 
Now why would that be? 

IMO, there was no visit.

Columbo wrote:

MayMuse wrote:

whodunit wrote:@Columbo---"Where both parties do agree is that there was a visit. If it didn't happen at all, there must be a reason for its subsequent creation."

Somebody had to 'see' MBM on the night besides the McCanns.

The "visit" we have to take DP & KM word; although it was not in KM's original statement? ( unable to remember if it was in DP's) 
Now why would that be? 

IMO, there was no visit.

So my next question is: if the visit was fabricated, why are the accounts so wildly different? I mean it wouldn't be a complicated thing to make up. And, didn't KM actually say that DP *didn't* see MBM - or have I remembered that wrong?

MayMuse wrote:

I wasn't aware that CB visited the apartment that evening? Or do you mean at "high tea"? 
Why would they require any "confirmation" at all? 
To prove & provide an "independent" witness that Madeleine was fit & well on the 3rd 
IMHO

Realist wrote:

MayMuse wrote:

I wasn't aware that CB visited the apartment that evening? Or do you mean at "high tea"? 
Why would they require any "confirmation" at all? 
To prove & provide an "independent" witness that Madeleine was fit & well on the 3rd 
IMHO

I didn't state that Cat Baker visited the apt. that evening. What I stated was that they had an independent witness in the form of Cat Baker who had seen her an hour previously.  Faites attention!  MayMuse.

Realist wrote:

Joss wrote:

       

 BBM,  Perhaps Goncalo Amaral has an alternative theory nowadays so many years later and thinking further on Madeleine's case? 

I would have thought that Goncala's  best shot would have been when he was actually assigned to the case, Joss, when his mind would have been fresh and he had direct access to the evidence and parties involved. With the disclosure of the PJ files and the passing of time, I wouldn't have thought he was in any different position now than to those of us looking in from afar.

Disregarding the media garbage, this case is probably unique in respect to the proletariat being party to more or less, the same evidence that was available to the original investigation. I wouldn't have thought that the British police had much more evidence availed to them than we have, the only difference being,  they chose to ignore it.

Verdi wrote:@Joss wrote:  Perhaps Goncalo Amaral has an alternative theory nowadays so many years later and thinking further on Madeleine's case?


In fairness to Dr. Amaral, he was stymied from the start wasn't he?  Extraordinary case by any standards, a three year old child disappearing from a tourist complex in sleepy off-season PdL after only 5 days stay - foreign voices ringing in his colleagues ears;  chaos everywhere;  shouts of forced entry, paedophile; tramping around the crime scene;  at the same time the mass crowd ignoring essential advice given by the GNR/PJ.

No sooner had the GNR/PJ caught there breath and PdL was invaded by ambassadors... lawyers... UK police...  representatives of the UK's CEOP...  UK family liaison representatives... and to top it all - a dodgy eyed local resident arrives on the scene to act as translator.

Really I ask - what chance did they ever have of conducting an fruitful investigation.

Joss wrote:

Realist wrote:

Joss wrote:

       

 BBM,  Perhaps Goncalo Amaral has an alternative theory nowadays so many years later and thinking further on Madeleine's case? 

I would have thought that Goncala's  best shot would have been when he was actually assigned to the case, Joss, when his mind would have been fresh and he had direct access to the evidence and parties involved. With the disclosure of the PJ files and the passing of time, I wouldn't have thought he was in any different position now than to those of us looking in from afar.

Disregarding the media garbage, this case is probably unique in respect to the proletariat being party to more or less, the same evidence that was available to the original investigation. I wouldn't have thought that the British police had much more evidence availed to them than we have, the only difference being,  they chose to ignore it.

I think GA being a seasoned investigator of nearly 30 years probably knows a lot more than the public is privy to. Plus he writes books too, so would be pretty clued in to what's what in the McCann case i would think. I'm also not sure if all of the PJ files were actually released to the public either?

Tony Bennett wrote:

Joss wrote:I am not really familiar with PB's theory on what she thinks happened to MBM?...Btw, do you know where the theory of PB's about that could be found, if you could post a link please, would be interested to read it. TIA.

This is actually quite an important question, since this thread is actually discussing Pat Brown's theory.

I think I can summarise it from what excerpts I've seen from her book, and from other places where she has written about her theory.

These are the key elements:

1. Madeleine was alive all week until after 6pm on Thursday 3 May 2007
NO

2. They were leaving the children all evening in a locked room 
I don´t think they left their children alone at all that week.

3. Madeleine was at a high tea between 4.45pm and 6.00pm on 3 May as per the evidence of the McCanns and Catriona Baker
I don´t think it´s a coincidence that Baker was the last "independent" witness who saw Madeleine, I think there is even a strong possibility that Baker have some knowledge about what happened.

5. They all panicked and dreamt up the abduction hoax that evening
The "abduction" was planned through the week and staged on evening May 3rd

6. They got rid of the body that evening
Something was going on at Monday, 30 April

7. 'Smithman' was a genuine sighting but she can't be sure if it was Gerry McCann or perhaps someone else carrying Madeleine, and
I have a strong feeling that Smith knew Murat more than he told the Police.

8. She basically supports the conclusions of Goncalo Amaral in his book about what really happened to Madeleine.
All respect for Mr Amaral,but today I think he knows that something else was going on and he knows very well that a case with a missing girl or an accident don´t include Special branch, MI5 and a National security case.


Sorry Pat.

April28th wrote:

Joss wrote:

Realist wrote:

Joss wrote:

       

 BBM,  Perhaps Goncalo Amaral has an alternative theory nowadays so many years later and thinking further on Madeleine's case? 

I would have thought that Goncala's  best shot would have been when he was actually assigned to the case, Joss, when his mind would have been fresh and he had direct access to the evidence and parties involved. With the disclosure of the PJ files and the passing of time, I wouldn't have thought he was in any different position now than to those of us looking in from afar.

Disregarding the media garbage, this case is probably unique in respect to the proletariat being party to more or less, the same evidence that was available to the original investigation. I wouldn't have thought that the British police had much more evidence availed to them than we have, the only difference being,  they chose to ignore it.

I think GA being a seasoned investigator of nearly 30 years probably knows a lot more than the public is privy to. Plus he writes books too, so would be pretty clued in to what's what in the McCann case i would think. I'm also not sure if all of the PJ files were actually released to the public either?

There's a ton of stuff he knows which wasn't released with the PJ files. Sans Gaspar statements and the cremation hypothesis he hasn't gone outside what was available to him at the time - and allowed to be published in the files. You have reems of names, offenders, casual interviews, people who don't need to be associated with the case etc. Also plenty of media which wasn't released.

All of that is known - so I continue to commend Mr. Amaral for not showing his hand outside a courtroom. But saying the knowledge we have is on par with what he knows is not accurate.

I'm anxious to read his new timeline book. Whether he still sticks to the 3rd is critical.

And to preempt that - following the accident on the 3rd hypothesis may not be accurate, but often it's only proving the event (in this case the 'aftermath') happened to a jury that is necessary. So I'm not personally going to be overly critical if he stays on the 3rd.

Columbo wrote:

So my next question is: if the visit [between Payne and Kate McCann] was fabricated, why are the accounts so wildly different? I mean it wouldn't be a complicated thing to make up.

MayMuse wrote:The "visit" we have to take DP & KM word; although it was not in KM's original statement? ( unable to remember if it was in DP's) 
Now why would that be? 

IMO, there was no visit.

Joss wrote:

Realist wrote:

Joss wrote:

       

 BBM,  Perhaps Goncalo Amaral has an alternative theory nowadays so many years later and thinking further on Madeleine's case? 

I would have thought that Goncala's  best shot would have been when he was actually assigned to the case, Joss, when his mind would have been fresh and he had direct access to the evidence and parties involved. With the disclosure of the PJ files and the passing of time, I wouldn't have thought he was in any different position now than to those of us looking in from afar.

Disregarding the media garbage, this case is probably unique in respect to the proletariat being party to more or less, the same evidence that was available to the original investigation. I wouldn't have thought that the British police had much more evidence availed to them than we have, the only difference being,  they chose to ignore it.

I think GA being a seasoned investigator of nearly 30 years probably knows a lot more than the public is privy to. Plus he writes books too, so would be pretty clued in to what's what in the McCann case i would think. I'm also not sure if all of the PJ files were actually released to the public either?

Joss wrote: BBM,  Perhaps Goncalo Amaral has an alternative theory nowadays so many years later and thinking further on Madeleine's case? 

ChippyM wrote:

Joss wrote:

Realist wrote:

Joss wrote:

       

 BBM,  Perhaps Goncalo Amaral has an alternative theory nowadays so many years later and thinking further on Madeleine's case? 

I would have thought that Goncala's  best shot would have been when he was actually assigned to the case, Joss, when his mind would have been fresh and he had direct access to the evidence and parties involved. With the disclosure of the PJ files and the passing of time, I wouldn't have thought he was in any different position now than to those of us looking in from afar.

Disregarding the media garbage, this case is probably unique in respect to the proletariat being party to more or less, the same evidence that was available to the original investigation. I wouldn't have thought that the British police had much more evidence availed to them than we have, the only difference being,  they chose to ignore it.

I think GA being a seasoned investigator of nearly 30 years probably knows a lot more than the public is privy to. Plus he writes books too, so would be pretty clued in to what's what in the McCann case i would think. I'm also not sure if all of the PJ files were actually released to the public either?

Files were definitely held back. There is an index on Mccann Files.  http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MISSING_PAGES.htm

The main categories held back were,

"Category A 
relate to people identified during the inquiry whose possible link to the events is extremely unlikely (the most tenuous) and whose right to privacy would be infringed if their personal information were left on file (basically the 'pervy percy' list).
- Category B 
relate to crimestopper data with respect to sightings, the TV program having guaranteed anonymity. 
- Category C 
relate to information from people - often criminals or having a criminal history - that was volunteered by them and they should not be put at risk for having come forward."


There are also thought to be statements missing from holiday makers and staff. I have read in various reports there were thought to be 20 - 30,000 pages but roughly 11,000 were released. I don't know how accurate the 20,000 is but if true that's alot of other statements Amaral might be privy to and possible anonymous sightings of goings on and suspects.