Re: **NEW** Daily Mirrors, 18, 21 & 22 Apr - EX-DETECTIVE COLIN SUTTON IS ACTIVELY CONTRIBUTING TO THIS THREAD (was: Daily Mirror, 18 Apr 2017 "What REALLY happened the night Madeleine disappeared")

[Doug D]

Who dreamed up this little snippet? Never seen any mention of the opening time being a problem and not sure it's even correct.

‘But Kate and several other members of the group thought it was too far away from their rooms and complained it did not open until 7pm.’


Obviously why they booked the Tapas for 8.30!

[Nina]

Who dreamed up this little snippet? Never seen any mention of the opening time being a problem and not sure it's even correct.

‘But Kate and several other members of the group thought it was too far away from their rooms and complained it did not open until 7pm.’


Obviously why they booked the Tapas for 8.30!

Just how far away was the Millenium Restaurant? The whole group minus the McCann family, went every morning for breakfast.

[tnb]

No mention of Eddie and Keela speaks volumes......thanks Colin TTFN.

[RosieandSam]

I have great faith in the abilities of these dogs in general.  On the handful of occasions I used (different) dogs operationally they were reliable in that they directed us to areas where forensic material was found.  I accept that dog findings alone are not evidential.  

One of the areas of this case where my understanding is lacking is what happened after Eddie and Keela indicated - how the material was then analysed and how it came to be discounted.

Then shame on you Colin for not pursuing this most important line of inquiry.

(I posted links to FSS reports earlier)

Never, ever in my professional life have I released a report with my name on it without thrashing the evidence to the point where I was comfortable that I had 'nailed it'.  During that exercise I was also required to 'trash' the bogus evidence given to me.

[Jill Havern]

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




Hmmmmph! So much for researching before forming an opinion when he's already got a book written!

Gonçalo worked on the case and wrote a book and has been villified by the McCanns, forced to divorce.

Colin never worked on the case and has written a book but I bet he won't be sued by the McCanns because to publish a book in the UK it must be pro-McCann.

Shame on you Colin. Shame.

[tnb]

What can we expect from this?
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
ADDED BY A MOD:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 
What REALLY happened the night Madeleine McCann disappeared

As nanny breaks her 10-year silence


'Gerry frantically looked under cars while Kate paced up and down crying: "they've got Maddie"' says child-carer who worked in the Praia da Luz resort where Maddie vanished

BY MATTHEW YOUNG -   22:00, 17 APR 2017

A nanny who looked after Madeleine McCann has told how the youngster’s parents were plunged into despair and panic when the ­horrifying truth she had vanished sank in.

The former child minder said she is still haunted by the image of dad Gerry desperately trying to find their missing daughter while she tried to comfort weeping mum Kate who cried: “They’ve taken her.”

Breaking her silence after 10 years, the witness also claimed the resort from which Madeleine vanished was considered so unsafe nannies were handed rape alarms and told to not go out alone. And she slammed the Portuguese police’s handling of the disappearance, insisting their ­blundering scuppered any chances of finding who had snatched three-year-old Madeleine.

[Photo by Getty]  Kate and Gerry make emotional appeal after their daughter was abducted while they were at dinner

Speaking of that dreadful night in May 2007, the ex-nanny – who looked after the girl several times – said: “A parent came to me and said there was something going on, and said someone’s looking for a child, I didn’t instantly think it was Maddie.

"A couple of minutes later I walked into Kate crying, friends comforting her, Gerry looking under cars, and it just blew up. I don’t even think she saw me. I just stood next to her and tried to comfort her. She was pacing up and down. The worst possible thing had just happened to her.

Cop who searched for Madeleine McCann says she might be hiding in plain sight 'and not know who she really is'. “I think I said something like, ‘She’ll be found, these things happen all the time.’ She was crying, but almost in a catatonic state, and Gerry was very distressed. That’s the one thing I really remember from him, looking under the cars. I can’t forget that.

“We were told to start looking in bins in case her body was in there. It was at that point we realised this was serious.”

Along with other staff, the ex-carer, who worked for travel firm Mark Warner at the the Ocean Club resort, sifted by hand in the dark through industrial-sized bins and piping leading into the sea in their hunt for Madeleine. They also walked Praia da Luz’s small, winding streets searching for the missing girl until they were told, against their wills at 5am, that it was time for bed.

But the woman, who we are not naming, said she is still furious with local police , who she claimed took 90 minutes to arrive on the scene. And she told how people were in and out of the apartment where Madeleine vanished from – contaminating a ­potential crime scene.

The former nanny added: “I know I didn’t step into that apartment but pretty much everybody else did. So, evidence gone, nothing. There was nobody there to say, ‘We need to lock this off now.’ The police didn’t get there for ages, maybe an hour and a half, so we were looking for her. And at the end of the day, no matter how much you’ve been trained with ­children, we were children, mainly ­teenagers, we’re not police. “That’s why police were trying to get everyone’s timelines, because they weren’t there.”

She also told how she was interviewed by officers in the wake of Madeleine’s disappearance and later detectives from ­the Met’s Operation Grange handed her two pages of statements they had retrieved from their Algarve compatriots.

Her original statement was four to five pages long, but the one the Portuguese had been working from was only two pages long – missing a number of details from her interview. The woman claimed “whole chunks of information were missed out”.

She added: “I think a lot of things should’ve happened differently. ­Unfortunately the effects were catastrophic.”

And the carer told how she was astonished Kate and Gerry were ever deemed suspects in their own child’s ­disappearance. She is still constantly quizzed by people about the case who ask if “the parents did it”. She said: “I tell them no, there’s no way at all. A, timings and B, where it was, their r­eactions, the whole thing. Not a chance.”

The woman also told how Madeleine was a favourite among the child minders. Her allocated nanny was Catriona Baker, but others also got the chance to look after her. The carer added: “I remember her character and ­temperament. She was slightly shy, very sweet. Not loud or precocious.

“We obviously give the same care to all the children, but she was a real cutie and a real sweetheart. If you asked her, ‘Can you just pass me that?’ She’d be like, ‘Sure.’

“She was easy for us, and you were happy to sit and help out this pretty little girl who’s really nice.”

While the Ocean Club was clearly popular with British holidaymakers like the McCanns, from Rothley, Leics, the former child minder claimed it was considered an unsafe place for those who worked there. After she arrived she was stunned when a fellow nanny passed on a message from hotel staff to never venture off the site alone.

She added: “I just couldn’t get over how different it was to other Mark Warner resorts.

“We were told, ‘Here’s a rape whistle, don’t go anywhere by yourself, ever.’ There’d been a girl attacked the year or so before in Praia da Luz. It didn’t sound like a family resort to me.

“I just got the feeling the locals didn’t want us there.” It emerged in 2014 that 11 years earlier a 10-year-old British girl had been sexually assaulted “in the heart” of Praia da Luz. 
 
The victim came forward three years ago after a Scotland Yard appeal revealed a string of potentially linked sex assaults on young UK girls across the Algarve between 2004 and 2006.

Mark Warner, which operates in resorts all over the world, quit Praia da Luz in 2015. Madeleine vanished as her parents ate with friends at a tapas bar just 40 yards from where she slept next to twin siblings, Amelie and Sean.

But the former nanny, who couldn’t face child minding again after the Algarve horror, said dining while kids were in the apartments was “really normal” in such resorts. And she insisted there was no evidence Kate and Gerry would ever neglect their kids. She said: “I remember thinking, even before I knew them, how they were the picture perfect family.”

[Photo: The People] The tapas bar was not far from the family's apartment

Asked if she thinks Madeleine is still alive, the woman said: “Think possibly is the wrong word, but hope. I hope she is still alive. It’s probably very naive, but the best case scenario of a very horrible situation, is that she was procured and taken for a rich person who didn’t have children.

“I can’t go anywhere else in my head. I can read it about other people and know how horrible that seedy world is where children are sold. But my brain won’t go there with her. I just switch off.

“But I think the only person who knows exactly what happened is Madeleine. Can I believe it’s 10 years on? Yes and no. No because 10 years seems like a really long time, she’d be nearly 14. And yes, because sometimes, when I talk about it, it feels like I’m right back there again.

“I wonder if she’s alive. Does she even remember? Does she remember her parents? I’m probably less harrowed by it now, but that’s just because, although it’s awful, it’s become accepted.

“‘It’s Madeleine, she’s gone missing but it would just be the best day ever if I could be told that she’s been found.”

Operation Grange, which was last month given £85,000 of Home Office funding to extend its probe until September, still speaks to witnes

Ineresting the DM offering help to those sh^^&ing themselves.

[RosieandSam]

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




Hmmmmph! So much for researching before forming an opinion when he's already got a book written!

Gonçalo worked on the case and wrote a book and has been villified by the McCanns, forced to divorce.

Colin never worked on the case and has written a book but I bet he won't be sued by the McCanns because to publish a book in the UK it must be pro-McCann.

Shame on you Colin. Shame.

That's the problem with the 'sell-for-money' people (ex-cops, authors etc)

"Give me a week or three and I'll have an opinion" Sutton had already written the book and was here on CMOMM the leech.

For the first three weeks after Madeleine's disapearance I refused to believe that the McCanns could be involved.  But here I am 10 years later - and a whole lot wiser - and I thank goodness I had an open mind then. 

When the PJ files were released I was in 7th heaven.  I could finally corroborate my own suspicions about a cover-up, 'lying', contradictions.

[Jill Havern]

I wonder why he was here though, if the book was already finished?

[Patience]

I wonder why he was here though, if the book was already finished?

Maybe he's still in the process of writing it? 

[JulieC]

I started to read this thread from page 6/9. I was really pleased to see an ex policeman 'appearing' to be prepared to look at both sides.

Oh how sickening to see it appears his motive is to promote a 'new' book. It will be as one sided as KM's tome. 

Pathetic he chose to try and pull the wool over peoples eyes.

[Jill Havern]

UK Tabloid News: Murder chief for Maddie
by [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]   [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

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

PROBE: Det Chief Insp Colin Sutton

Top cop spearheads new probe into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

By Lucy Panton, NoW Crime Editor

BRITAIN'S top murder cop has been lined up to spearhead a new probe into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, we can reveal.

Det Chief Insp Colin Sutton, 49, who has been involved in some of the UK's biggest inquiries - including the murder of Milly Dowler and the terror reign of the Nightstalker sex beast - is seen as the best man to handle the challenging review.

Senior child protection officer Jim Gamble has asked Scotland Yard to take a fresh look at the three-year investigation.

He blasted Portuguese cops for their handling of the hunt for Maddie - who vanished aged three from her family's Algarve holiday apartment in 2007. Now the Met Police are set to review all leads in the case, using technology and standards expected in a UK homicide or kidnap.

It will delight Maddie's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann. A senior police source said: "They deserve reassurance that everything that can be done has been done."


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

To Inspector Colin Sutton, you can start probing this one:

[url=https://2.bp.blogspot.com/_lWXrpwC28yU/SwM0Ot3tKjI/AAAAAAAAHDE/i35sfx8IT28/s1600/torn book.png][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.][/url]

A child's book perhaps belonging to Madeleine where the cover and end pages were ripped off, on the 3rd May 2007, just before the police appeared, it seems the McCanns and their friends, the Tapas, took some time to establish some kind of alibis, two different timelines re-written, hand written by Gerry McCann. Who at a time of sheer panic, since their 3 year old daughter had just disappeared from an unlocked apartment, had just the enough spirit and cool-headedness to write the G9 (PJ/UK police 'Operation Task' codename for the whole Tapas group) timelines, as I said perhaps with an intention of establishing alibis - it must be because Gerry McCann is an expert Cardiology consultant, surely, that would explain as well the following photo, taken just 9 days after Madeleine was, as per the McCanns thesis abducted by order by a paedophile ring - the photo was taken on the 12 May 2007, when the soon-to-become media starlets are coming out of a mass at the Luz Church, Praia da Luz, Algarve, in Portugal (not Spain nor Morocco), a mass that celebrated Madeleine Beth McCann's 4th birthday.

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

From Joana's blog 7 years ago!  [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[RosieandSam]

CRIME AND INVESTIGATION - EVIL-UP-CLOSE

INTERVIEW WITH COLIN SUTTON

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


Are there any unsolved cases across the world that you would be interested in tackling?

Not now, I am too happy being retired! But had the Madeline McCann review come my way before retirement I would have stayed to complete that; it is the greatest mystery of our generation, and despite its obvious difficulty I would have been unable to resist the opportunity to try to help solve it.


Do take a look at the CRIME AND INVESTIGATION SITE: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Recognise anyone?

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

SKY: 553 & 554 (+1)

Is this the Sky Channel making the documentary that Colin Sutton says he has contributed to?

[Hobs]

Hi Colin, How say you the multiple times kate and gerry and also helpfully clarrie have told us Maddie is dead?

Clarence Mitchell: "I believe Kate and Gerry are not responsible for Madeleine's death"

Time stamp from 4:29




Then we have the following admissions that Maddie is dead.

Gerry mccann:
"There's no evidence that Madeleine is dead and there's no evidence to implicate us in her death"
Except this is plenty of forensic evidence of a death in the apartment and a corpse in the hire car.
Right here he has just admitted Maddie is dead when he claims "there's no evidence to implicate us in her death"

Then we have his mea culpa on his blog:

"Sometimes people do things for reasons that even they cannot understand. An act of madness, an accident or sudden impulse can lead to consequences that people may never have imagined or intended. Faced with such a situation we believe any human soul will ultimately suffer torment and feelings of guilt and fear.”

The we have kate telling us Maddie is dead:


Kate said of the Portuguese police: "They want me to lie - I'm being framed.
 "Police don't want a MURDER in Portugal and all the publicity about them not having paedophile laws here, so they're blaming us."

Now why would kate introduce murder when the expected given their claims would be the word abduction?
Murder is on kate's mind and this would preclude an accidental death otherwise she would have used the word death.


Then we have her most damning and concerning admission of Maddie's death:

Kate said: "It really isn't easy," coping. "Some days are better than others. ... There's days when you think, 'I can't do this anymore,' and you just want to press a button, and WE'RE ALL GONE, and it's all finished, and WE'RE ALL TOGEATHER AND GONE. Wherever. But you can't, you know. Just occasionally you'll have a -- if you're having a really bad day, which we do. And you can't help but think that."


Here was have leakage and worrying concerns regarding kate's mental health.
The only way they could ALL be togeather if if she knew Maddie was dead.
Kate admits to wanting to press a button, a euphemism for killing the twins and gerry and then herself, in other words kate wants to commit murder-suicide in order for them ALL to be togeather and gone.
If Maddie was alive then kate would have committed murder-suicide and left Maddie an orphan.
This is not the language or behavior of an innocent parent, especially a mom, it is however the expected behavior of a guilty parent who faces losing everything including her children and who cannot contemplate allowing her children to be raised by someone else.
A case we have seen sadly all too often of if i can't have them, no one can.

This is even more concerning given her intense hatred of Dr. Amaral who she wanted to destroy at all costs and she has lost.
Not only that, they have been officially declared by the Portuguese Supreme Court of having not been cleared of involvement in Maddie's disappearance (death)
Even the media are no longer as supportive as they were.
The net is closing in and my fear is she will crack and self harm or harm the children.

Her own mother spoke of kate telling her she was haunted:

Susan, said: "She told me she has difficulty sleeping and wakes during the night. I asked: 'Do the twins come and wake you up?'

Kate said: "No, it's Madeleine. She comes in.'

Live people cannot and do not visit their loved whens if they are alive allegedly abducted in this case.
However, dead people are reputed to visit their loved ones.
Another admission Maddie is dead even to the extent of visiting her mother in their house.

Then the oopsie about the one year anniversary that leaked too much information:

Gerry McCann, 38, said: “One of the ideas is maybe getting all the people who have publicly supported us to come together. I don’t just mean from the UK but from different parts of the world.

We want a big event to raise awareness that she is still missing.

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

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

The question arises in that how did he know Maddie wouldn't be found by the one year anniversary?
He would and could only know that if he knew Maddie was dead and her body unlikely to be found any time soon.


There is also statement analysis by Peter Hyatt of an Interview they did Aug 11 2011

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

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

Question for Analysis: Do the McCanns have guilty knowledge of what happened to Madeleine?

We have not covered the McCann case in detail because I had hoped the original police interview transcripts would be released which would likely give us the information we seek, through the lens of Statement Analysis: the truth. In other interviews, the McCanns have not been asked strong questions. Most interviewers use the opportunity for self promotion, employing lengthy statements before the question, which draws the reader's attention to the Interviewer, and not to the information. Below is an interview conducted when the McCanns published their book.


Statement Analysis is in bold type. Underlining and color added for emphasis, with blue used to show the highest level of sensitivity in analysis. Red is used to indicate deception. I have cut out most of the video commentary in order to keep to the interview. This analysis is "Statement Analysis" and is limited to the linguistics; not any other form of evidence.
Thursday, 11 August 2011


Looking for Madeleine McCann – Sunday Night. Video and transcript

...but first, for four years Kate and Gerry McCann have lived a never ending ordeal and they still don’t know when or if it will ever end. It began on a family holiday in Portugal when Madeleine, their four year daughter, simply vanished. She hasn’t been seen since. Tonight, the mystery deepens. You’re about to see home video never shown before and learn the vital clue Madeleine left behind. Here’s Rahni Sadler.

[Cuts into Video of Madeleine McCann dressed a pink fairy outfit:
Gerry McCann: Okay, spin around darling. Right round. Oh yes, I can see your wings.
Kate McCann: Big smile. Kate laughs.
Gerry McCann: Oh yes. One more. Big smile. That’s pretty.]

Gerry McCann: She was incredibly beautiful baby actually.

Kate McCann: We sound like the most biased parents on the planet now but she was just really compact and was just really the really nice, round, perfect head...and......you know...and then she, she opened her mouth ...the whole world knew she was with us...


Every parent calls their child "perfect" yet here we have a specific: "really nice, round, perfect head" is the language of a doctor, particularly when a child is first delivered.
Note in recollecting her birth, KM says "the whole world knew she was with us" using "the whole world" as a reference.
Gerry McCann: She’d McCann level volume, there’s no doubt about that.
[Cuts into Video of Madeleine sitting on the stairs with her twin siblings singing:
Madeleine: Clap your hands together one two three. Clap your hands...
Gerry McCann: Yay well done. Okay, let’s sing another one.]

Kate McCann: I always wanted to be a mother, erm, I don’t know, maybe that stemmed from being an only child and sort of, you know, wanting that feeling of family.

Voice over: Madeleine was the daughter Kate and Gerry McCann always wanted. For years Kate struggled to fall pregnant so when Madeleine came along they felt blessed. They loved to photograph her and she loved being photographed.

Voice over: this is the last picture of Madeleine taken seven hours before she disappeared.

Gerry McCann: There’s a photo of her that afternoon that was taken at 2:29 (laughs)I think, we’ve got it recorded on the digital camera and er she was just sitting by the pool er with myself and we’ve both got our feet just paddling and she’s so happy.


Voice over: In late April 2007, the McCanns decided to travel to Portugal for a family holiday.

[Cuts into a video of Madeleine climbing the flight stairs to the aeroplane where she stumbles on the steps:
Voice over: In the pink pants climbing the stairs to the plane is Madeleine
Gerry McCann on the video: Oop day...you alright?]

Voice over: It was the McCanns first holiday overseas as a family and they went with three other couples
[video on airports shuttle bus pans in Gerry’s direction...‘cheer up Gerry, we’re on holiday.’ Gerry:‘F**k off']

Gerry McCann: It’s a small resort out of season, end of April beginning of May and it was incredibly quiet er, we felt very relaxed there, very relaxed.


When a couple speaks together, the pronoun, "we" is expected and used often. Where we expect the change is when we come to the highly personal loss of a child. The expected is that a mother will use the pronoun, "I" when speaking about the child. Fathers do also, but given maternal instinct, particularly one who just spoke of the birth, we expect to hear the pronoun, "I" to be employed.
Voice over: In the evening the children were put to bed by half past seven before the adults had dinner together down at the pool. From where they ate, Kate and Gerry could see the back of their apartment and left the door unlocked.

Gerry McCann: If you measured it directly from the back of the apartment there’s a straight line to where we’re dining, it’s only 50 metres

Interviewer: 50 Meters?

Gerry McCann: Er..that, that’s a direct line...

Kate McCann interrupts: 49 point 4 on Google if you want to be really specific


KM shows the use of the internet, with the word "Google" early in the interview. The reader should be considering if the internet is a sensitive topic to KM.
Gerry McCann: But the proximity was very close


The word, "but" often refutes that which came before it. Here, we do not know what would be refuted by GM since they appear to agree about the distance, but only in a "direct" line and not actual access.

Voice over: Madeleine and the twins slept in a room at the front of villa 5A. Kate and Gerry believed their shuttered bedroom window, overlooking the car park and street, was closed and locked. Every half an hour the parents would take turns to check on each other’s children.

Gerry McCann: We thought that was the best thing erm, and it seemed to work absolutely fine and we didn’t have any problems right until the Thursday morning when Madeleine said “why didn’t you come when we cried last night?” We thought that’s odd

Pronouns are instinctive, and reliable. It is to be noted here that GM says "we", first when it came to thought. He reports what both of them were thinking.
Next, we note anything in the negative as very important. He reports, again, in the plural, that "we didn't have any problems";
People generally do not report "not" having problems; and mark time by problems that arise. It is to be noted that here, in the negative, he again, uses the word "we" and not "I"; with "I" being the strongest link to truth in the English language.
Yet, it could be that he is speaking for both, and knew what both thought, and what both did not think.
He then quotes the child:
"why didn't you come when we cried last night?" as being the words of Madeleine.


Please note that by quoting Madeleine, he continues to use the word "we."


Did a child of Madeleine's age actually use the word "we" and not the pronoun, "I"?


I find this odd.


Having raised 6 children, and having taught parenting classes for many years, small children are selfish. They are concerned with "I" and use the pronoun, "I" and "me" and "my" most often in life, until they are later taught to be concerned with the well being of others.


The use of the pronoun "we" when quoting Madeleine is very odd.


The reader should question whether or not this is an artificial quote for the purpose of alibi building.


Research has shown what parents of teenagers have always known: guilty people will use the pronoun "we" often, in the psychological attempt to share guilt (Dillingham) and spread out responsibility among others. Even if, via discussions, husbands and wives know what each other thought, it is very unlikely that a child of Madeleine's age would raise concern for her siblings' crying.


Is this story telling for the purpose of alibi building? This leads the interviewer to draw a conclusion: Interviewer: You now think somebody had either tried to get into the room or was in the room and woke them up the night before


By using the word "now", in 2011, the Interviewer intimates that he is familiar with past claims by the McCanns. This should alert them to this fact and put them on the defensive. Interviewers must be very careful and avoid
Kate McCann: Er it seems too much of a coincidence that she made that comment and then that happened that night.


Statement Analysis teaches that the analyst (reader) should believe exactly what someone says unless they prove otherwise. When someone says, "if I was you, I would not believe me" it is good advice to follow. Here, KM says it is "too much" of which we may agree. There is doubt in my mind that Madeleine used the word "we" and here, KM refers to "that" (distancing language) comment and says that it only "seems" too much. She does not affirm that Madeleine said it.

Interviewer: Looking back now, you think that could have been your one chance...to save her


This is not a question but a statement.

Kate McCann: Well as soon as ermm I’d discovered that Madeleine had been taken it..it just hit me straight away what she said that morning and I just thought, my God, someone tried the night before.


Note that she is referring back to the moment of discovery. This is critical.
Instead of saying that she discovered Madeleine "missing", she spoke of the conclusion, "had been taken" (passive) and then connects the thought of Madeline's statement "straight away" and "just" thought: with "just" being minimization, used by comparison. This means she compared this thought with a much larger thought.


Let's say I wanted to sell you a car for $15,000 but I fear you will say it is more than you can afford, so I first show you a car for "$20,000" and have you immediately say, "it is too much!" of which I then roll out the next car and say, "this one is just $15,000", meaning that I compared it to the greater number.


When KM said that she "just" thought, it indicates that she had "straight away" thought of something much worse.


It is difficult to imagine the shock and adrenaline (hormonal) rush at the discovery of a missing child, that someone would have the presence of mind to compare a prior night's comment from a child, with something much worse, at the moment. It takes time for us to process, particularly while under such duress (hormonal rush).


This appears to be an artificial placement of a thought.


Madeleine's quote does not appear credible, and due to the 'fear' or 'fight/flight' shock of a missing child, that a mother (maternal instincts inflamed) would be able to think through these things, conclude abduction and tie it to the night before leads me to conclude:


It does not appear credible.


When we are first in a shocking situation, it takes time to debrief and reason. This is why, for example, the placement of emotions in the 'perfect' or logical part of an account is an indication of having placed them there artificially.


"I was walking my dog when I came upon a drug deal in progress. One man pointed a gun at my head, while the other was laying on the ground. The gunman turned and ran off from me. The man on the ground got up, and ran off in another direction. I called police."


This is a true account of something that happened to me many years ago.


After calling 911 I thought it was strange that I was not afraid even though the gun was pointed right at me.


A few hours later, I woke up with my hands shaking, unable to go back to sleep. It took time to process the event due to the hormonal flush that I felt during the event.


If I wished to tell this account in story telling:


"It was a normal night, like any other..." signaling that this night would be anything but normal.


"As I came upon the gunman, my heart began to pound, and fear flushed through my veins..."


That is not what happened.


It takes humans time to process thoughts and emotions.


Here, KM puts her thoughts, even using logical conclusions and comparisons, all while being a mother of a missing child.


It is not credible. The hormonal rush would block out the thought process, and the recall should be very clear, also due to the presence of the hormonal increase.
voice over: On Thursday night, Kate put her daughter to bed for the last time.

Kate McCann: My memory of that evening, it’s really vivid, I mean she was really tired but she was just cuddled up on my knee and we read a story and we also had some treats, some crisps and biscuits erm and then after they’d done the usual kind of, toilet, teeth erm we went through to the bedroom and read another story: If your happy and your know it...ermm...[looks at the interviewer then away and back again] ...yep.


The memory of "that" (distancing language of the loss of a child is emotional distancing done to protect) evening. Appropriate use.


"it's really vivid" is due to the hormonal rush of whatever it is that happened that night.


The pronoun "we" shows unity, cooperation between KM and her children.


The word "just" is comparison (see above). This indicates that when Madeleine was very tired, she often acted differently than she did on "that" night: on "that" night, she cuddled up. This indicates that on other nights when she was tired or overtired, she did not cuddle, but was likely difficult. In this description, she not only cuddled, but did so on mother's lap.


Since they are doctors, one should wonder what caused Madeleine to not act out but only to "just" cuddle and sit on her lap.


Was Madeleine given something to help her sleep so that the parents could go out to dinner?Voice over: At 9pm Gerry checked on Madeleine and the twins


The interviewer (or Voice over) introduced the time of 9PM. We look to see if "9PM" is confirmed by GM:

Gerry McCann: I’d actually stuck my head around the door and I, I just lingered for a few seconds and thought how beautiful she was erm and that’s the last time I saw her.


This is an important statement. It shows two things, in particular:
1. GM does speak for himself, with the pronoun, "I"
2. He used the word "actually" in his checking on Madeleine.


The word "actually" indicates that he is comparing two or more ways of checking on her.


"Would you like to go home now? No, actually, I would like to stay for the whole show..."
"Would you like seafood? No, actually, I would like a steak."
It is used when comparing two or more things.


What was GM comparing his checking with? Whenever I hear the word "actually", I follow up with more questions to learn what the person was comparing.


Note how he also brought his thoughts into the time frame. One might wonder why he feels the need to describe what he thought at that time, since he was checking to see if the kids were okay and asleep while they were at dinner.


GM did not affirm the time he checked on Madeleine.

Interviewer: Last time you saw her

Gerry McCann closes eyes and swallows: Mmmm

Interviewer: You thought how lucky you were


Note that GM did not use the word "lucky" but it is introduced by the Interviewer. This is always to be avoided.


Gerry McCann: Exactly. Your world’s shattered within an hour

Please note that GM, father of missing child, did not say his world was shattered with "an hour" but said "Your world's shattered..."


The expected is that the father of a missing child would say "My world's shattered"


Fatherhood is very personal and up close. We do not expect to hear the 2nd person pronoun used here. This is distancing language that is very unexpected.
voice over: At 10pm it was Kate’s turn to look in on the kids


Reminder: We are not viewing reality; we are viewing verbalized reality.
We are not analyzing Kate McCann; we are analyzing the words KM chose to employ.


Here, we lay out what is expected: "I got there and Madeleine was gone" would be the first thing that a parent would say. (anything similar) Everything pales beyond a child missing and is a lesser, or 'trivial' detail. What does she say?
Kate McCann: The bedroom door where the three children were sleeping was open much further than we’d left it. I went to close it to about here, and then as I got to about here it suddenly ...slammed. And then as I opened it, it was then that I just thought, I’ll just look at the children. And literally as I went back in the curtains of the bedroom which were drawn, were closed ...whoooosh...it was like a gust of wind kind of blew them open.


1. The bedroom door
2. Where the three children were sleeping
3. open further than we'd left it
4. I went to close it
5. It suddenly slammed
6. I opened it
7. I just thought I'll just look at the children
8. The curtains of the bedroom were closed
9. like a gust of wind blew them open

Kate McCann: And the curtains which had been closed just swung open into the room and reveal that the shutter was all the way up and the window had been pushed right across and then I just knew...I just knew she’d been taken.


10. curtains just swung open
11. shutter was revealed
12. window pushed right across
13. Thoughts: "I just knew, I just knew"


Deception indicated

In any event told, there are three sections to an account:


1. What happened before the event
2. The event itself
3. What happened directly after the event.


Truthful accounts will focus primarily on the event, itself.
The "form" of an answer or statement that is truthful will look like this:


25% of the words or lines written will be dedicated to what happened leading up to the event. This is the "Introduction" to the event.


50% of the words used, or lines written, will be about the most important part of the account: the event itself.


25% will be of what happened afterwards.


A statement is tested on its "Form" and if there is a major deviation from this formula, it can be said that the Account is unreliable.


The overwhelming number of deceptive accounts has the Introduction heavily weighted. 85% of deceptive statements have more information in the "pre" or "Introduction" phase.


Here is an example:


1. "My job is to take care of the clients. That day, I brought
2. my client to the park.
3. He escalated by screaming.
4. He took off his shirt and cut himself.
5. He picked up rocks and threw them at people
6. and screamed at them that he would kill them.
7. I held him by both arms until he calmed down.
8. Once he was calm, I told him that
9. I had to call 911.
10. I waited for police to arrive."


This account is 10 lines in length.
The incident where the client
acted out begins on line 3. It ends at line 7.
What he did after the client calmed down is 2 lines.


Introduction: 2 lines: 20% intro
Escalation of client: 5 lines, or 50%
After event: 3 lines 30%


This would be seen as a Truthful or Reliable statement on its form as it is close to the 25%, 50%, 25% form for truthful accounts.


Accounts that are false or deceptive are often 70% or more in the "Introduction" phase.


In Kate McCann's account, she is 100% in the pre-event of Madeline being missing.


Her answer, by its Form, is deceptive.

She never said Madeline was missing.

voice over: Kate says that after a quick frantic search of the apartment she ran back towards Gerry who was still with their friends at the table by the pool.

Gerry McCann: I know exactly where the table was. It was kinda this bit, so it would be about around here. And er, I was kinda sitting in this bit.
Kate was clearly distraught and I jumped up but, kind of disbelief. She can’t be gone. She can’t...she can’t possibly be...how can she be gone? And I was saying that to Kate as we were both running


Here we have GM using the pronoun, "I" for himself.
Note body posture of "sitting" is a signal of tension for him, yet he was only "kinda" sitting. "Kinda" is a form of qualifier which avoids precise language.
Note that he does not say that "Kate was distraught" (the expected) but that she was "clearly" distraught, showing that being "distraught" is sensitive. Why the need to emphasize the obvious and expected? We would not think that a mother of a missing child is anything but distraught. We must be now on alert for persuasion rather than truth reported.
Voice over: Police were called within fifteen minutes. But they didn’t arrive for nearly an hour. It took them another two hours before they bothered to seal off Madeleine’s bedroom. British investigators later called it the worst preserved crime screen they’d ever encountered. Road blocks and checks weren’t put on Portugal’s borders for a full twelve hours and in days hundreds of guests, potential witnesses and suspects had checked out and left without ever having been interviewed.

Kate McCann: The night seemed so long, every second was excruciating and it was dark and er, you just want there to be light and everybody searching and Madeleine found.


KM did not describe Madeline missing. She did not say that she wanted everyone searching.
She did not say she, the mother, wanted Madeline found.


Statement Analysis teaches that the subject will guide us:


She said "you just want" and not that "I just want"


If KM cannot bring herself to say that she wanted Madeleine found, we cannot say it for her. Using "you" is 2nd person, distancing language. A missing child is very personal to a mother and we expect to hear the oft-used pronoun, "I", something an adult has used millions of times and is quite good at using it properly. It's absence means that she does not commit herself to the statement.


KM does not commit to finding Madeleine.

Interviewer: Did you kill your daughter?


Yes or No questions are the easiest to lie to, however, we are still able to analyze responses.


If the subject says, "no" and when asked, "Why should we believe you?" and says, "Because I told the truth when I said "no", it is a very strong denial.
Therefore, even though yes or no questions are low stress questions for liars, it is still a good question when followed up with "Why should we believe you?"

Gerry McCann: No. That’s an emphatic no. I mean the ludicrous thing is erm what, I suppose what’s been purported from Portugal is that Madeleine died in the apartment by an accident and we hid her body. Well when did she have the accident and died, because, the only time she was left unattended was when we were at dinner so ...if she died then, how could we of disposed – hidden her body. You know, when there’s an immediate [inaudible but sounds like he was about to say ‘search’] it’s just nonsense. And if she died when we were in the apartment or fell and di...why would we ...why would we cover that up?


This is an important question and a vital answer. Here, I have repeated his answer, and added emphasis for the analysis:

No.


"No" is a good answer, and is expected. Each word after the word "no" becomes important. It would be best to say "no" and nothing else because in innocency, there is no need to explain.


That’s an emphatic no.


This now weakens his denial, as he repeats it (any repetition is sensitive) and calls for emphasis (another weakness)

I mean the ludicrous thing is erm what,


He is answering the question for himself, and begins with the pronoun, "I", which is good. This connects him to the sentence. We want to see him stay in the first person singular, as truthful.


"the" is an article. Articles are instinctive and exempt from the personal, subjective, internal dictionary we all possess. He addresses "the" ludicrous thing", which is now important. What is "the" ludicrous thing?



I suppose what’s been purported from Portugal is that Madeleine died in the apartment by an accident and we hid her body.


"The" ludicrous thing is now weakened by "I suppose". If it is "a" ludicrous thing, than he might only "suppose" rather than know for certainty. Something is "ludicrous" when it is not only false, but obviously false. It is ludicrous to think a man comes down a hot chimney with gifts. "Ludicrous" means to accept as false, without question. Yet, he, himself, questions it by the weak, "suppose."


When we "suppose" , we allow for someone else to "suppose" something else.


"I locked my keys in the car" is strong.
"I think I locked my keys in the car" is weaker; allowing for me, or others, to think that maybe I did not lock them in the car, but left them elsewhere. "Suppose" is the same thing; he is only speculating, yet, the article, "the" addresses a very specific "ludicrous" issue.


The issue: Madeliene died in the apartment and "we" hid her body.


He does not say that this is "the" ludicrous thing. He only supposes it, allowing for himself, and others, to suppose it to be ludicrous, or not to.


People do not like to lie directly, as it causes internal stress.


This is not an embedded admission as he is reporting that this is what's been purported, however, he allows for us to suppose that it may, or may not be, ludicrous.


Well when did she have the accident and died, because, the only time she was left unattended was when we were at dinner so ...if she died then, how could we of disposed – hidden her body?


He now asks a question, "When?"
Please note that when a person asks a question in an open statement, and does not wait for the Interviewer to answer, it may be an indication that the subject is re-living the event, working from memory, and speaking to himself.
Note that whenever someone is reporting what happened and has the need to say 'why' something was done, it is very sensitive.


Note the change to "we" from the stronger "I" and note when it appears in context: Madeleine dying while "we" were at dinner.


This is to establish an alibi.


If an accident happened, it happened while we were at dinner, so it could not have been us.


This is his reasoning, yet he does not state it but raises it as a question.


Questions can be answered.


Roger Clemens said, 'If I have all these performance enhancing drugs it would mean that someone supplied them. Who is this? Who supplied me? I wish he would come forward.'


The man who supplied him with his performance enhancing drugs did this very thing. He came forward and we heard the telephone recording between Clemens and the man who delivered his drugs.


The challenge shows a need to challenge.


In the McCann case, he raises "accident" as evidence that he and his wife could not be involved.


Yet, had he or Kate accidentally gave Madeleine too much medication to sleep through dinner, she could have expired while they were at dinner.


He raised the question for us to answer. Answering it is not difficult.


Those who lie do not like to be challenged as to veracity and often turn the challenge on others, like Clemens, and like Lance Armstrong, who sued anyone who dared question his veracity, because he could afford to tie up lawyers in court. He added ridicule to his comments.


Billie Jean Dunn uses insults, combing sexual and violent language in her insults. She can bear many things, but cannot bear not being believed.


It is not surprising that McCann would blame police or others.


You know, when there’s an immediate [inaudible ] it’s just nonsense. And if she died when we were in the apartment or fell and di...why would we ...why would we cover that up?


Note that he allows for her to die when they were in the apartment, not when "I was in the apartment" moving away from the singular, "I" and does not ask, "Why would I cover that up?" but "why would we...?"
He did not wait for an answer from the interviewer.


Why would they cover it up?


Because of medicating her to sleep is illegal. They would lose custody of their other children, lose their license to practice medicine and go to prison.


When he asks "why?", we are able to, without much effort, answer him. Yet, he does not ask for himself. He began with "I" but moved, with the topic of possible guilt, to the sharing of guilt/responsibility, to "we."
Kate McCann: It gets even more ludicrous that we’ve obviously hidden her somewhere incredibly well where nobody’s found her ..


Note that GM only "supposes" ludicrous activity, yet KM goes even further with "even more";
Note her words, that she herself frames:
"we've obviously hidden her somewhere."


This is not something we expect to hear from innocent parents. It is too painful.


Both GM and KM allow for them to be involved. Innocent people generally do not allow for any possibility of involvement. Even while attempting to ridicule the notion, we see signals of sensitivity.


These are red flags.
Interviewer: Incredibly well

Kate McCann: and we’d hidden her so well that we’d decided we’d move her in the car which we hired weeks later and you know, it’s just ridiculous

Note the change of language from "ludicrous" to "ridiculous" as a "car" enters her language.
Interviewer: When you come back to Portugal do you feel closer to Madeleine?

Kate McCann: Although I don’t know where Madeleine is that is the last place that, you know, I saw her, held her, and I guess there’s a part of me that still feels connected to her there so.


please note that this is present tense and should be looked at closely. She does not know where Madeleine is, presently, uses the pronoun, "I" and is strong, in spite of saying it in the negative. It could be for several reasons:


1. She is not involved
2. GM hid the body without her (not likely supported by the use of "we" above)
3. She was placed somewhere where her body would move, such as water;
4. She does not know due to being placed where wildlife would 'move' her from the location.


Commonly, small bodies disposed in water are difficult to locate due to current. Haleigh Cummngs, Baby Lisa, and Baby Ayla come to mind.
Regarding kidnapped kids found years later:
Kate McCann: I think kids can be written off, you know, missing kids can be written off too easily. You cannot do that, you cannot give up on a child.


Regarding her child being kidnapped (the context of the voice over), Kate McCann tells us that this is not the case with Madeleine:


1. kids" is used
2. "You" cannot do that; "you" cannot give up. She does not say "I cannot do that" and "I cannot give up".
3. Note the change from "kids" to "child" has a change of language.
4. Note the article, "a" child; not "my" child.


This is a strong indication that Kate McCann knows that Madeleine was not kidnapped and will not be found, years later.

Voice over: With no police force currently investigating Madeleine’s case, the McCanns are using their own money, including royalties from Kate’s book to hire investigators and former police to continue the search for Madeleine.

Gerry McCann: Kids are survivors


Note that he identifies Madeleine's looks, behavior, and voice with "McCann" yet here, only "kids" are survivors, not Madeleine. He does not say that Madeleine is a survivor. This is an indication that he knows Madeleine did not survive.


Kate McCann: You know, Madeleine means tower of strength. Wherever she was, whoever she’s been with, whatever’s happened, we will get her through it
Listen to what KM says, and do not interpret:
She does not say that Madeleine is a tower of strength who has survived and will be found. She only says what the name means.


Note carefully: She does not say that Madeleine is strong and a survivor and that, therefore, Madeline will get through this. She says, "we" will get her through it.
This is a denial of Madeleine's strength and survivor status.


People do not like to lie. Here, KM is not lying because she does not say that Madeleine is a survivor.

Interviewer: You will not rest until you find your daughter, until you wrap your arms around her


This is a direct question (language given, unfortunately) but is a direct question:

Kate McCann: I don’t believe any parent could, you know, and I don’t believe we could ever reach the point where we just think oh well, we’ve done everything now, you know. Whilst the situation remains as it is, you know, Madeleine’s out there and she needs us to find her


1. Please note that KM does not answer the question.
2. Please note that she only affirms that "Madeleine's out there", something that police and doubters also believe, just as many believe that Baby Ayla is "out there" and "floating" and that other dead children that are not laid to rest in a proper burial are "out there." She does not affirm that Madeleine is alive. This is a natural denial we expect from parents.
3. Runs away from commitment: She begins with "I don't believe..." yet switches to "we" repeatedly. This appears to be a very strong signal that they both need to share guilt and responsibility.


Note that the question was directed directly to her, but she avoided a direct answer with "parents": this means the question is very sensitive to her.


Why would the question of not finding rest until she wraps her arms around her child be sensitive to the mother of a missing child?
Gerry McCann: Mmmm

Interviewer: You’ll keep looking forever

Kate McCann: We will


This is a strong indicator that Kate McCann knows that there will not be an end to the search: confident that she will "forever" (Interviewer's words) be looking.


It is similar to OJ Simpson saying he would "never stop" looking for the "real" killer of his ex wife.


Instead of searching until she is found, she affirms that "we" will keep looking forever, without end.


This interview was much better than the others I have seen and has convinced me that the McCanns have guilty knowledge on what happened to Madeleine on the night they reported her missing.

Perhaps the "accident" that they refer to is their use of medication to put Madeleine to sleep while they were on vacation, of which they then discovered that they had unintentionally overdosed her.


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

[Liz Eagles]

I read with great interest Colin Sutton's 2011 blog on Cash for Answers, I hope he doesn't mind me pasting its content here - if he does I'm sure the forum will be only too happy to swiftly remove it.

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

While I was a police officer I gave lots of information to journalists, throughout Fleet Street and the broadcast media. None of them gave me a penny in return; indeed there was never any suggestion that payment might be involved. I suspect that each of them knew me well enough to appreciate that the second payment was even mooted it would be the very last conversation I had with them.

Since I retired I have been paid by a number of media organisations; in every case it has been in return for my commentary, my opinion or technical assistance. I have maintained a rigid stance that I will be paid only for what I create in my mind post-retirement, and that nothing else is on offer.

I sincerely hope that both the serving officers who sold information and the journalists who sanctioned payment will be properly dealt with for the corruption in which they have been complicit. That is necessary if the reputations of these two sometimes competing, sometimes symbiotic, often infuriating but ultimately always essential institutions are to be in any way preserved.

The baby and bath-water interface must be managed carefully. The release of information by officers, as I always did, could and should be encouraged for the sole purpose of furthering the interests of the Police - either to garner public support and confidence in investigations, or to protect, quite properly, the reputation of the service. Any other motivation, especially personal enrichment, must be jumped upon. But do not restrict the very necessary and very useful relationship which most journalists and most police officers employ to such good effect for the public good.

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

[RosieandSam]

Ex-Met Police chief withdraws from Suffolk Police and Crime Commissioner election

PUBLISHED: 07:00 30 March 2016

Former high-ranking Metropolitan Police detective Colin Sutton will no longer be standing for election as Suffolk police and crime commissioner.

Mr Sutton, who lives in mid-Suffolk, cited other commitments as the reason for his decision to withdraw his name from the ballot.

The ex-detective chief inspector – known as the man responsible for the capture of notorious murderer Levi Bellfield – was due to stand as an independent candidate in the election on May 5.

Although Mr Sutton said he would not rule out putting his name forward again in the future, he added he now realised he would not be able to commit the time required to the post if he had been successful.

The 55-year-old said: “I have got other things that would preclude me from doing the job, and on reflection I would not really have the time to do it full-time if elected.”

Mr Sutton had been one of five candidates for Suffolk police and crime commissioner.

The others are the present incumbent Tim Passmore, who is standing on behalf of the Conservatives, Labour’s Cath Pickles, Helen Korfanty – Liberal Democrat, Simon Tobin – UKIP, and Terence Carter – Green Party.

Speaking in January, Mr Sutton said: “I think that the police service has been under all sorts of attacks in terms of political imperatives. To have a PCC who is beholden to the Government is unhealthy, in my opinion.

“We have difficulties in terms of financing, but not withstanding that we can be better in what we do if we concentrate our resources on local policing rather than too many 
officers and staff in non-policing roles.

“Although traditional crime is reputedly on the decrease it is still a rural county for the residents of Suffolk who want to see a visible presence and firm action taken.”

Mr Sutton led the investigation which culminated in the conviction of Levi Bellfield for the London murders of Amelia Delagrange in 2004 and Marsha McDonnell in 2003, and the attempted murder of Kate Sheedy in 2004.
Bellfield was sentenced to a whole life tariff in 2008.

He has since converted to Islam and changed his name to Yusuf Rahim.

Although he was not directly involved with the Milly Dowler inquiry, Mr Sutton believed Bellfield fitted the killer’s profile and gave his name to the Surrey police team investigating the 13-year-old’s murder in 2002. Bellfield was convicted of her murder in 2011.

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

[Guest]

I will return here, I promise.  As it is, we are getting into areas that I cannot really explore further prior to the Sky TV film airing.  We do try to take a different perspective on things in that; I will be interested to hear the views from the forum afterwards.

There has been much forum activity this day so forgive me if I've missed something.  What areas are 'we' getting into that 'you' cannot explore further prior to the Sky TV film airing?

I was under the impression, maybe mistakingly, that you are more than familiar with the case of missing Madeleine McCann as your name has cropped up over the years on more than one occasion - so what are you exploring - this forum for some reason?  You have already completed your input with the Australian production to be aired on Sunday and the Daily Mirror supplement - does your contribution to Sky TV cover a different angle that forces your reticence?

You must excuse my cynicism but Sky TV and News have so far shown an undeserved bias towards the McCann faction - I'm not anticipating a volte-face from the Murdoch empire.  When is this Sky TV 'film' due to be aired?  Has it been produced in collaboration with the Portuguese police, the Metropolitan police, or indeed any official body that is or has been actively involved with the investigation of Madeleine McCann's disappearance - or is it just another spin to detract from the serious work of crime solution?

From where I'm standing this appears to be yet another attempt to divert attention away from the truth, it's par for the course as has been apparent time and time again over the past 10 years.

What part do you play in this masquerade?

[Tony Bennett]

I will return here, I promise.  As it is, we are getting into areas that I cannot really explore further prior to the Sky TV film airing.  We do try to take a different perspective on things in that; I will be interested to hear the views from the forum afterwards.

There has been much forum activity this day so forgive me if I've missed something.  What areas are 'we' getting into that 'you' cannot explore further prior to the Sky TV film airing?

What part do you play in this masquerade?

Prostitute?

"I'll say anything, do anything, as long as the money's all right. And it's quite a good make if you're working for Rupert Murdoch...and he pays double if my work comes out in the Sun and SKY News! I just need to learn my lines".

[sallypelt]

Don't read this, if you have a weak stomach or have an allergic reaction to BS:
Line of enquiry
Does mystery phone call hold the key to finding Madeline McCann’s abductor?

New lead suggets Portuguese cops were called to break-in miles from where the tot was snatched - just as search began.
A MYSTERY call reporting a burglary minutes after Madeleine McCann went missing could hold the key to finding her abductor.
Portuguese cops were called to a break-in nine miles from where the tot was snatched as the frantic search began.
The new lead was buried in Portuguese police files.
A detailed analysis of police phone records for the first time reveals how the National Republican Guard police station in nearby Lagos received a call 16 minutes after [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]was reported missing – diverting them in the other direction.
One of the only patrol cars on duty was sent to respond to an incident in the town of Odiaxere, northeast of Praia da Luz.
The new lead suggests local police received a call 16 minutes after Madeleine was reported missing
The vital lost hour is now being probed as investigators focus on the theory that the triggering of a burglar alarm could have been used as a ploy to cover the abductor’s escape.

The burglary call was made from a building in the Portuguese capital of Lisbon owned by Securitas Direct Portugal – a firm contracted to oversee alarm systems.
It can also be revealed that traces of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]scent from her clothes were not picked up on the night she vanished because local sniffer dogs were attending a police function hundreds of miles away.
Two untrained dogs failed to pick up any clues in the crucial first minutes. But the day after, trained dogs followed a trail to apartment 5C, two doors from where the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] were staying, that was reportedly unoccupied.

Scotland Yard are eager to trace two blond-haired men seen on the balcony of that apartment at 2.30pm on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]



After reading this guff, can anyone tell me why it was necessary to LIE about "jemmied shutters" if  the above garbage story is true?

[Phoebe]

  We do try to take a different perspective on things in that; I will be interested to hear the views from the forum afterwards.


Am I correct in interpreting the above statement to mean that the Sky program Mr. Sutton refers to is a joint venture between himself and the program makers (We?) and that he had a direct influence on the "perspective" of this program? If so can we expect to hear him clearly explain why the parents came under suspicion - The complete lack of any evidence to support abduction, the revised and contradictory statements from them and other witnesses, the findings of the blood and cadaver dogs, the forensic evidence? Any program which ignores these facts cannot possibly be described as an accurate or comprehensive review of the "disappearance" of the child.  

[Phoebe]

Don't read this, if you have a weak stomach or have an allergic reaction to BS:
Line of enquiry
Does mystery phone call hold the key to finding Madeline McCann’s abductor?

New lead suggets Portuguese cops were called to break-in miles from where the tot was snatched - just as search began.
A MYSTERY call reporting a burglary minutes after Madeleine McCann went missing could hold the key to finding her abductor.
Portuguese cops were called to a break-in nine miles from where the tot was snatched as the frantic search began.
The new lead was buried in Portuguese police files.
A detailed analysis of police phone records for the first time reveals how the National Republican Guard police station in nearby Lagos received a call 16 minutes after [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]was reported missing – diverting them in the other direction.
One of the only patrol cars on duty was sent to respond to an incident in the town of Odiaxere, northeast of Praia da Luz.
The new lead suggests local police received a call 16 minutes after Madeleine was reported missing
The vital lost hour is now being probed as investigators focus on the theory that the triggering of a burglar alarm could have been used as a ploy to cover the abductor’s escape.

The burglary call was made from a building in the Portuguese capital of Lisbon owned by Securitas Direct Portugal – a firm contracted to oversee alarm systems.
It can also be revealed that traces of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]scent from her clothes were not picked up on the night she vanished because local sniffer dogs were attending a police function hundreds of miles away.
Two untrained dogs failed to pick up any clues in the crucial first minutes. But the day after, trained dogs followed a trail to apartment 5C, two doors from where the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] were staying, that was reportedly unoccupied.

Scotland Yard are eager to trace two blond-haired men seen on the balcony of that apartment at 2.30pm on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]



After reading this guff, can anyone tell me why it was necessary to LIE about "jemmied shutters" if  the above garbage story is true?

What madness is this? If the police had been called to investigate a traffic accident, a drunk and disorderly incident, reported dangerous driving, someone peeing in public or spraying graffiti would they suggest it was deliberately staged so Madeleine, miles away, could be abducted? All the Algarve's sniffer dogs were at a police function, in their best bibs and tuckers presumably.

[Phoebe]

Don't read this, if you have a weak stomach or have an allergic reaction to BS:
Line of enquiry
Does mystery phone call hold the key to finding Madeline McCann’s abductor?

New lead suggets Portuguese cops were called to break-in miles from where the tot was snatched - just as search began.
A MYSTERY call reporting a burglary minutes after Madeleine McCann went missing could hold the key to finding her abductor.
Portuguese cops were called to a break-in nine miles from where the tot was snatched as the frantic search began.
The new lead was buried in Portuguese police files.
A detailed analysis of police phone records for the first time reveals how the National Republican Guard police station in nearby Lagos received a call 16 minutes after [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]was reported missing – diverting them in the other direction.
One of the only patrol cars on duty was sent to respond to an incident in the town of Odiaxere, northeast of Praia da Luz.
The new lead suggests local police received a call 16 minutes after Madeleine was reported missing
The vital lost hour is now being probed as investigators focus on the theory that the triggering of a burglar alarm could have been used as a ploy to cover the abductor’s escape.

The burglary call was made from a building in the Portuguese capital of Lisbon owned by Securitas Direct Portugal – a firm contracted to oversee alarm systems.
It can also be revealed that traces of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]scent from her clothes were not picked up on the night she vanished because local sniffer dogs were attending a police function hundreds of miles away.
Two untrained dogs failed to pick up any clues in the crucial first minutes. But the day after, trained dogs followed a trail to apartment 5C, two doors from where the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] were staying, that was reportedly unoccupied.

Scotland Yard are eager to trace two blond-haired men seen on the balcony of that apartment at 2.30pm on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]



After reading this guff, can anyone tell me why it was necessary to LIE about "jemmied shutters" if  the above garbage story is true?

What madness is this? If the police had been called to investigate a traffic accident, a drunk and disorderly incident, reported dangerous driving, someone peeing in public or spraying graffiti would they suggest it was deliberately staged so Madeleine, miles away, could be abducted? All the Algarve's sniffer dogs were at a police function, in their best bibs and tuckers presumably.

The first call to police is logged at 10.41pm and the GNR arrived from Oxidare at around 11pm. How did the abductors KNOW that Kate wouldn't make her check at 9.30pm instead of Matt? If she did the alarm would have been raised before the burglary call from Oxidare came through so this is nonsense or are the writers of this rubbish claiming to know the exact moment Madeleine was abducted at? Is so, from whom did they get this information?

[pennylane]

Madeleine wasn't reported missing until 10:50, nearly an hour after the McCanns alleged she went missing, and Scotland Yard say 15 minutes later there was a burglary report?  Big whoop! How would alleged kidnappers know what time police were going to be called in order to divert them at just the right time? This smacks of sheer desperation on the part of beleaguered operation grange (SY).

Interesting SY are now referencing sniffer dogs, but not of course the blood and cadaver dogs that hit on all things McCann.  Besides if SY were legitimately reviewing this case, they would have discovered long ago that several witnesses claimed the McCanns and tapasnik friends were searching for Maddie 30-40 minutes earlier than the 10:00 time they claimed.   

Britain's finest....... at avoiding the elephant in the room!

imo

[Guest]

After reading this guff, can anyone tell me why it was necessary to LIE about "jemmied shutters" if  the above garbage story is true?

Oh come on salypelt, play the game - this is Sunday tabloid extravaganza!  Take it for what it's worth, entertainment value if nothing else - either that or..

[sandancer]

Don't read this, if you have a weak stomach or have an allergic reaction to BS:
Line of enquiry
Does mystery phone call hold the key to finding Madeline McCann’s abductor?

New lead suggets Portuguese cops were called to break-in miles from where the tot was snatched - just as search began.
A MYSTERY call reporting a burglary minutes after Madeleine McCann went missing could hold the key to finding her abductor.
Portuguese cops were called to a break-in nine miles from where the tot was snatched as the frantic search began.
The new lead was buried in Portuguese police files.
A detailed analysis of police phone records for the first time reveals how the National Republican Guard police station in nearby Lagos received a call 16 minutes after [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]was reported missing – diverting them in the other direction.
One of the only patrol cars on duty was sent to respond to an incident in the town of Odiaxere, northeast of Praia da Luz.
The new lead suggests local police received a call 16 minutes after Madeleine was reported missing
The vital lost hour is now being probed as investigators focus on the theory that the triggering of a burglar alarm could have been used as a ploy to cover the abductor’s escape.

The burglary call was made from a building in the Portuguese capital of Lisbon owned by Securitas Direct Portugal – a firm contracted to oversee alarm systems.
It can also be revealed that traces of [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]scent from her clothes were not picked up on the night she vanished because local sniffer dogs were attending a police function hundreds of miles away.
Two untrained dogs failed to pick up any clues in the crucial first minutes. But the day after, trained dogs followed a trail to apartment 5C, two doors from where the [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] were staying, that was reportedly unoccupied.

Scotland Yard are eager to trace two blond-haired men seen on the balcony of that apartment at 2.30pm on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]



After reading this guff, can anyone tell me why it was necessary to LIE about "jemmied shutters" if  the above garbage story is true?

What madness is this? If the police had been called to investigate a traffic accident, a drunk and disorderly incident, reported dangerous driving, someone peeing in public or spraying graffiti would they suggest it was deliberately staged so Madeleine, miles away, could be abducted? All the Algarve's sniffer dogs were at a police function, in their best bibs and tuckers presumably.

" A new lead " 

Is that what all the police sniffer dogs were​ at the police​ function​ for​ ?

Dog treats​ , bones and a tennis ball​ to play with​ 

Were they being​ retrained​ in sniffing out B.S just send them​ along​ to the Sun office​ they'd have​ a whale of​ a time​ !

I thought it apart​ment 5 j that​ was empty and the dogs​ showed interest in ? 

Do they​ seriously get paid​ for writing​ utter rubbish​ like​ this​ ? 

I clearly​ spent years in the wrong job , but I prefer​ to sleep at night with​ a clear​ conscience .

[pennylane]

After reading this guff, can anyone tell me why it was necessary to LIE about "jemmied shutters" if  the above garbage story is true?

Oh come on salypelt, play the game - this is Sunday tabloid extravaganza!  Take it for what it's worth, entertainment value if nothing else - either that or..

All that money and all these years later, and that's the best they can come up with!

[MRNOODLES]

I will return here, I promise.  As it is, we are getting into areas that I cannot really explore further prior to the Sky TV film airing.  We do try to take a different perspective on things in that; I will be interested to hear the views from the forum afterwards.

There has been much forum activity this day so forgive me if I've missed something.  What areas are 'we' getting into that 'you' cannot explore further prior to the Sky TV film airing?

What part do you play in this masquerade?

Prostitute?

"I'll say anything, do anything, as long as the money's all right. And it's quite a good make if you're working for Rupert Murdoch...and he pays double if my work comes out in the Sun and SKY News! I just need to learn my lines".

Looks that way doesn't it.  

Yeah I have my opinions but hell, show me the Boulton & Watts and I'll be your b*tch and say whatever you want me to.

[Guest]

I have great faith in the abilities of these dogs in general.  On the handful of occasions I used (different) dogs operationally they were reliable in that they directed us to areas where forensic material was found.  I accept that dog findings alone are not evidential.  

One of the areas of this case where my understanding is lacking is what happened after Eddie and Keela indicated - how the material was then analysed and how it came to be discounted.

I'm getting mixed messages here outlandish - sorry oatlandish (genuine mistake)!  No, stand alone dog alerts are not evidential but corroborated by forensic analysis, they become a catalyst for crime solution - this area of evidence in the case of Madeleine McCann's disappearance is pivotal to understanding her fate.

Again I say, you have clearly been following this case since the beginning (or thereabouts) yet you claim to be hazy about the chain of evidence - probably the most debated subject above all others - the British Forensic Science Service analysis of material harvested as a result of the EVRD and blood dog alerts, from apartment 5a Ocean Club and the Renault Scenic rented by the McCanns?

You feel competent enough to give the benefit of your expertise to an Australian television network, the UK tabloid Daily Mirror and a forthcoming Sky TV 'film' despite being hazy about probably the most, if not the most, important evidence in the Madeleine McCann case?  I think I'm beginning to understand your choice of forum user name.

One more question before I conclude - why did you register with CMoMM at this late stage?  Was it to promote the proposed Sky TV 'film' you mention?  I can't think it was to learn from the years of slog undertaken by various members or to participate in discussion because, as I say, you already consider yourself qualified to represent this highly controversial case by involvement with TV and press outlets.  You baffle me - if that's your objective then I'm not interested!

[Guest]

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

Did you read what John Stalker said?

McCanns 'are hiding a big secret', former police chief claims

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

Then we have Lee Rainbow, who at the time was senior behavioural investigation consultant at the National Policing Improvement Agency

"The potential involvement of the family in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann cannot be discarded, and it can be considered that, when pondering the basis for research, this hypothesis deserves as much attention as the criminal with sexual motivations that has been previously prioritised."

I don't believe Mark Harrison had any delusions either.

[Jill Havern]

As Colin has joined CMOMM for 'Ten years on, parents of missing Madeleine McCann cling to hope', here we have a quote by Colin in 2012 from:

Five years on, parents of missing Madeleine McCann cling to hope

Cop: Parents have to believe

I asked Colin Sutton, a former chief inspector of London's Metropolitan Police, for his take on what may be going on behind the scenes. Could Madeleine really be alive after all this time?

"Technically, you have to use these media opportunities to get help," he said, "you can't stress in an appeal that she may be dead or you are switching people off."

Sutton, who was in the police's murder squad, then told me about some depressing statistics that all those involved in the police case review would be fully aware of.

"If a person is missing for more than 48 hours, there is a 90 percent chance that they won't be coming back. A lot of the team will be thinking that she simply isn't alive," he said.

It's a fact, he added, that the McCanns also would have had to face and that while police officers would have been sensitive, they certainly wouldn't have shied from it as a distinct possibility.

"They would have been told she is dead," Sutton said, "and they would have accepted that, but they, as her parents, also have to believe that she will be found one day."

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

Nothing much has changed for Colin in the past five years, then, except he is still using "these media opportunities" to promote the idea that "the parents have to believe she will be found one day",

oh, and he has a new book on the horizon.



Here's an old one from Lazzeri that gives Colin a mention:
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[ChippyM]

Colin,

Is it you writing this book?

As the 10th anniversary of Maddie's disappearance approaches next month, the investigator has analysed multiple theories for a new book. 

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

If it is, I hope he completes his research to the point of what happened with the forensics from this case. Earlier in this thread he said he didn't have much knowledge of this. Or maybe like the dogs, they don't really warrant inclusion.