70 Questions AND still more reasons why there should be a full public enquiry into all aspects of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

41. For what exact purpose did John Geraghty obtain the church keys for Gerry and Kate?

42. Have the backgrounds of all those closely associated with the Mccanns been closely investigated including for example John Corner and David Payne? Allegations I believe have been made on the internet regarding these individuals going back to the seventies, has this been investigated to see whether truth in the rumours or not?

43. Have the FSS still got the samples sent for testing or have they been destroyed?

44A. Does the Madeleine McCann case demonstrate that, as Dr Gerald McCann proclaimed, the evidence provided by cadaver dogs is 'notoriously unreliable' - should there be a re-evalaution of their usefulness?

44B. Do the various explanations provided by the McCanns as to why the dogs might have been misled - ditry nappies, rotting meat, being called to provide death certificates etc. stand up to scrutiny?

45. Why were suspects/witnesses allowed access to LP files.

44C. Does it stand up to scrutiny re her claim of signing multiple death certificates re result of Eddie and her clothing?

46. Lisbon Uni carried out a 3D reconstruction based on the statements of the Tapas movements. They agreed that from the exercise abduction was impossible.
Why hasn't notice been taken of this?

Just posted this on Joana Morais's blog:-

What is it with some of these supporters of the McCanns? Even the most well trained & resourceful police forces in the world occasionally botch investigations into missing children.

There have been many cases in the US where police forces have failed to issue Amber Alerts. No police force or individual police officer responsible for investigating the case of a missing child should be scapegoated and held to ransom by disgruntled & frustrated members of the public for failing to find a missing child.

There are no perfect solutions in many cases of missing children and we must accept that however painful the reality of it may be.

REASON 47. If any mistakes have been made in a particular investigation into a missing child then it is the responsibility of all of us, as a society, to ensure that those mistakes are addressed and not repeated in future investigations (i.e. Public Enquiry)

The lessons to be learnt from any mistakes in a criminal investigation can only be achieved by addressing those mistakes in a controlled and civilised manner. Personal revenge, retribution & hatred against individual police forces or officers involved in investigating cases of a missing child is certainly NOT the answer and will only serve to harm future missing child investigations in my opinion.

48A. The Trustees for the Find Madeleine Fund (FMF) were administering money mostly donated by members of the public. Many of them thought that FMF was a charity.

Given their role as Trustees, what oversight, supervision and monitoring did the Trustees provide after appointing Kevin Halligen on a £500,000 contract - and by what means was that oversight, supervision and monitoring provided, i.e. by whom?

48B. In the light of the above questions, on what dates was Halligen paid money by the Trustees and, on each date, what amount was paid?

48C. Did all of the Trustees approve these payments?

48D. As it appears that Halligen must have been in breach of contract, are the Trustees proposing to sue Halligen for breach of contract?

48E. What were the terms of the contract signed by Halligen and the Trustees?

49 Were the appointments of all the private investigators voted on and was it unanimously approved or what was the majority that approved.

50 How were private investigators sourced? By recommendation or by advertising or sourced from advertisements? Who had the responsibility for sourcing PIs, and was it approved by the Trustees?

In researching this topic I have come across this list of '70 Questions' from another place.

Some of them duplicate some of the 50 suggestions already made on this thread.

There's not too much that can be considered libellous about simply asking a question, so I reproduce the list here, unedited, as I consider it has some very relevant questions on it:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1 When the McCann’s fled Portugal in September 2007, the British Police assisting the Portuguese enquiry left also. Madeleine was still missing, supposedly abducted. So why did the British Police quit the search the day after they were both made official suspects?

2 Since that day in September 2007, not one legitimate Police force has been actively looking for Madeleine, why?

3 Why were the Tapas 9 so keen to control the early stages of the investigation by writing out all of their timelines on Madeleine’s sticker book, before the Police had even arrived on the scene?

4 Why did the McCann’s with their limitless amounts of money coming in from generous donations, hire people who specialised in fraud and bomb disposal?

5 Why did the McCann’s ignore crucial Police advice by publicising Madeleine’s distinctive mark on her eye, which would almost certainly have guaranteed her immediate death and disposal?

6 Why did the McCann’s make Madeleine a Ward of Court after she had vanished? Was it to prevent any details of her medical records and other information from being made public for 75 years?

7 Why was it necessary to hire such a large team of lawyers when Madeleine first vanished, which also included Pinochet’s infamous extradition lawyer?

8 Why did Kate McCann refuse to answer all of the questions put to her?

9 Why did the McCann’s claim to know instantly that Madeleine had been abducted, yet waited 40 minutes before first contacting the Police?

10 Goncalo Amaral’s book, ‘The Truth of the Lie’, has now been released in 6 European countries, but not in the UK. It has recently been banned in Portugal. It is a factual account of the early stages of the investigation based on information contained within the officially released Police files, so why has it been banned?

11 Why did the McCann’s want the investigation shelved? It was within their legal rights to ask for the enquiry to remain open, which they turned down? Why?

12 Why did 3 UK Detectives deliver several files of information to the McCann’s home, shortly after they got back to the UK whilst they were still suspects?

13 Why did the cadaver and blood sniffer dogs Eddie and Keela, only indicate to their apartment and their car? I believe 7 properties and 10 cars were searched in total that day, but only the McCann’s apartment and car tested positive.

14 Why did the Home Office refuse to hand over to the Portuguese investigators details of the McCann’s bank details, credit cards and medical records? These are one of the first things any Police force obtains at the start of an investigation. So why were they refused assistance?

15 The British Authorities later informed the Portuguese Police that the McCann’s did not own any credit or debit cards? So how did Gerry manage to pay for his holiday?

16 Why were the McCann’s and their Tapas friends never seriously interrogated? Instead, during their Rogatory interviews the British Police assisted them with some of their answers, which can be clearly seen in their statements.

17 Why did Gerry delete all the phone calls from his mobile on the 2nd of May, the day before Madeleine disappeared and also one received from Kate on 3rd May at 23.17 p.m., just over an hour after she had raised the alarm? Neither went to search for Madeleine, so why did Kate need to call him? Where did he go?

18 Why did Gerry have to fly home to obtain something with Madeleine’s DNA on? Did he actually supply an accurate representation of Madeleine’s DNA to the Police? Why was there no DNA of Madeleine’s found in the apartment the night she vanished?, an apartment which she had lived in for 5 days? Not one strand of hair was found there belonging to the McCann twins either. It’s like the apartment had been scrubbed clean.

19 Why is the case filed under Homicide, Simulating a Crime & Hiding a Cadaver and not abduction?

20 How did the scent of cadaver from a dead body get on Madeleine’s Cuddlecat, a child’s red T shirt, Kate’s black/white cheque trousers and her white sleeveless top? Why only these items?

21 Why did Gerry have to move the position of the sofa in the lounge? The exact same sofa which was identified by the blood dog Keela, as containing minute traces of blood in 3 different positions on the back panel. The exact same sofa that Eddie the cadaver dog also identified the scent of cadaver behind. Is this just a coincidence, or is this evidence of staging?

22 Why did the British Government intervene and support them on an unprecedented level from day one?

23 Why did the British Government feel the need to appoint a spokesman Clarence Mitchell, to speak in public for the McCann’s and is still assisting them today? Has the British tax payer been paying for his services all this time?

24 Why are the British papers only interested in reporting on the abduction line, when there is not one shred of evidence to support this theory? In 2008, one third of the official police files was made available to the general public. Facts that every newspaper could have easily been printed without any fear of litigation. So why have they ignored all of this information?


25 Why was Kate so annoyed at being asked to attend the Police station in the early days to identify a little girl caught on CCTV, that was believed to be Madeleine?

26 Why would the McCann’s leave Madeleine in an unlocked apartment knowing she had a tendency to wake up and wander frequently at night?

27 Why did the British Secret Service immediately put the McCann’s under telephone surveillance and not inform the Portuguese Police?

28 Why would SOCA (the Serious Organised Crime Agency) get involved with a missing child?

29 Why did the British Police withhold a statement for at least 6 months from the Portuguese Investigators involving David Payne and Gerry McCann, over lewd allegations of paedophile behaviour as witnessed by another Doctor friend of theirs on a previous holiday?

30 Why was Gerry in possession of sensitive Police manuals only used by Special Police Services and Government Agencies? Who gave them to him and why?

31 Why did the McCann’s want Leicestershire Police heading up the investigation and not Scotland Yard? They wanted the help from the Government, but not the top Police Force, why?

32 Why was the McCann’s Lawyers worried that Kate’s answers could be seen to be incriminating, but not Gerry’s?

33 Why did they destroy Madeleine’s sticker book when there was a perfectly good note pad on the table?

34 Why was someone allowed back into the apartment to remove personal items before forensics had finished looking for evidence?

35 Why was Robert Murat made a suspect when none of the photo fits depicted a man who wears glasses?

36 Why did it take the British authorities nine months to pass the Gaspar’s statement over to the Portuguese investigators?

37 Francisco Moita Flores has said that “the mystery lies with one or two of the ten or twelve elements that used to enter that apartment”. Who are the other 3 people is he referring to?

38 In Kate’s diary she states, "I can't stop thinking about Madeleine, about her fear of pain". How would she know that Madeleine had a fear of pain?

39 Why did Kate in her group statement say that she pulled the curtains open, yet in the documentary state that the wind blew the curtains open?

40 Why did Gordon Brown and Jackie Smith both have to visit Leicestershire Police three days after the McCann’s flew home? Both have publicly claimed that they do not interfere in ongoing Police investigations.

41 Why did several members of the group claim Rachel made the Tapas reservation, when the receptionist has clearly stated it was a man?

42 Why was a CRG (Control Risks Group) fraud expert brought in on a missing child case?

43 Why did Brian Kennedy feel the need to contact the family who claimed that they saw Gerry McCann carrying a child in the streets just before the alarm was raised?

44 Why was it that only Kate’s fingerprints, was found in a position of opening that window?




45 Why did the McCann’s need a service wash the day after Madeleine vanished, washing clothing that belonged to Madeleine that could have been important to the investigation?

46 Why did David Payne not want the McCann’s to speak to Yvonne Martin, the Social Worker who tried to offer them help?

47 Why didn’t Dianne Webster want to rush off and check on her own grandchildren when Kate shouted Madeleine was missing?

48 Why did David Payne claim that everyone went to dinner together, yet Fiona claimed that David would stay behind to watch the children?

49 Why did the FSS when testing the hair samples found in the boot of the McCann’s hire car, refuse to confirm if it had come from a living or dead person, simply by checking to see if they showed any signs of proximal banding?

50 Not one single hair of Madeleine's was ever recovered from the apartment, so how did the McCann’s manage to find one to give to Danie Krugel the South African body finder?

51 Why did the McCann’s need to air their car boot?

52 Why did Gerry not tell Mrs Fenn that it was his daughter that had gone missing?

53 Why did Paul Gordon, the previous occupant of the McCann’s apartment, say he feels like a “chess pawn” after being contacted several times by Brian Kennedy?

54 How could Matt Oldfield claim to see the twins breathing laying inside their cots, when he never even entered Madeleine’s bedroom?

55 Why did Gerry first claim the doors were left locked, then changed his statement saying the patio door was left unlocked?

56 Why did the PJ need to forensically examine an apartment in Burgau in relation to this case?

57 Why did the Vatican remove Madeleine’s details from their website, one week after Kate and Gerry were made suspects?

58 Why would a missing child of only 13 days be made a Ward of Court?

59 Why did Stuart Prior when examining all the evidence against the McCann’s, say that "he had arrested people in England with much less", yet they never got arrested?

60 Why did the McCann’s and their supportive friends refuse to help the investigation by not doing a reconstruction?

61 Sir Christopher Meyer publically stated that the McCann’s did not want the press to be stopped, they had been asked, but they turned the offer down. So why did they later complain that the press were outrageous?

62 Kerry Needham, the Mother of Ben Needham who went missing from the Greek Island of Kos in 1991, has never received the same level of help the McCann’s got. Why was that missing child treated so differently?

63 Jill Renwick says she spoke to Kate at 7am, the morning after Madeleine vanished saying, ''Kate was at the police station in hysterics. When we spoke she said the police weren’t doing enough.'' Yet Kate did not go to the Police Station until that afternoon, so which one of them is lying?

64 Why have the McCann’s never once shown us the inside of Madeleine’s bedroom as it now looks?

65 Why were there other Doctors booked in the Ocean Club that week, not part of the Tapas 9 group?

66 Why did Gerry and Kate delete so many calls from their phones before the Police arrived?




67 When Oprah Winfrey asked Kate why she never showed any emotion, Kate said, “the last thing I want obviously is to cause any extra further harm to Madeleine”. Yet they have always stated there is no evidence that Madeleine has come to any harm, so what “extra further harm” is Kate referring to?

68 Is it just a coincidence that on the 13th May 2007, Jose Barra da Costa, former member of the PJ publicly claimed that the McCann’s are swingers, then two days later on the 15th May 2007, Robert Murat is declared arguido?

69 Why did the McCann’s ignore Police advice concerning the dangers of highlighting Madeleine's distinctive eye, which would ensure that she was killed?

70 Why did David Payne say “we have a pact”? A child is missing and they feel the need to have some kind of agreement. What for?

Some very good questions above.



To add to our list....................

49. Why did Kate put her finger under the twins noses to see if they were still breathing?

49b Why, pertaining to the above, if she suspected they were sedated did she not take them to a hospital and have them checked, and why were they not submitted for testing for drugs.

Just a suggestion Tony, but these questions would probably look better, if each of them was linked to a source, and the link given, preferably to the statements, rather than any newspaper articles. so that the person who gets this letter, would be able to cross reference and double check, to ascertain they are indeed correct.

candyfloss wrote:Just a suggestion Tony, but these questions would probably look better, if each of them was linked to a source, and the link given, preferably to the statements, rather than any newspaper articles. so that the person who gets this letter, would be able to cross reference and double check, to ascertain they are indeed correct.

Yes, sources are useful, sometimes essential.

I'd like to confirm that we'll be sending off in the very near future our letters renewing our demand for a full public enquiry into the whole affair.

I'd also like to thank everyone on this thread for their contributions to date, all have been taken into consideration although some points were more for any new possible police enquiry rather than for a public enquiry.

Just a small point about newspaper articles. These can vary right through from the excellent and informative to the speculative and sometimes to spin and downright lies. It depends on the subject matter.

In our letter, we will most certainly be referring and quoting from newspaper sources.

Let me give two specific examples.

The Evening Standard article on Kevin Halligen [August 2009] gave us a whole new insight into the Oakley International 'investigation' into Madeleine's disappearance. Now, some of it was sheer 'spin', for example the idea that intelligent doctors like the McCanns and multi-millionaire businessmen like Brian Kennedy could be 'naive' and 'duped' by a serial con-man like Halligen. Pull the other one, Mr Kennedy!

But the article also informed us that Kennedy interviewed witnesses, recruited staff, intimidated some witnesses into refusing to talk to the Portuguese police, and may have been involved in a mysterious 24-hour stake-out. Intimidating witnesses into not making statements is a crime. None of what Mr Hollingsworth wrote about Brian Kennedy has been denied or made the subject of legal action. I have never seen any apology or retraction from the Evening Standard. So we will quote from that newspaper article when writing to the government.

Similarly, the Mail on Sunday, quoting Johan Selle, Director of iJet, based in Virginia, U.S., explained [November 2009] precisely how his team fielded calls from members of the public to his Madeleine McCann 'information hot line', yet neither Halligen, nor the McCanns, nor Brian Kennedy, followed up a single one. There could be few clearer indications that this whole case is not what it seems. Contrast that with the monotonous refrain from the McCanns and Clarence Mitchell that 'one piece of information is all we need to unlock the key to finding Madeleine' or the singularly inappropriate jingly strap line: 'Pick up the 'phone and bring Madeleine home'.

So that newspaper article will also very much feature in our letters to government departments.

@ Quincy!

One would very much appreciate your list of '120 Questions' being deposited here if possible. Apologies if it is already ensconced here in the deep voluminous bowels of our archives.

candyfloss wrote:Just a suggestion Tony, but these questions would probably look better, if each of them was linked to a source, and the link given, preferably to the statements, rather than any newspaper articles. so that the person who gets this letter, would be able to cross reference and double check, to ascertain they are indeed correct.

I support that. Because already the pros are questioning no.19 'Why is the case filed under Homicide, Simulating a Crime & Hiding a Cadaver and not abduction? claiming nowhere was it stated that.

aiyoyo wrote:

candyfloss wrote:Just a suggestion Tony, but these questions would probably look better, if each of them was linked to a source, and the link given, preferably to the statements, rather than any newspaper articles. so that the person who gets this letter, would be able to cross reference and double check, to ascertain they are indeed correct.

I support that. Because already the pros are questioning no.19 'Why is the case filed under Homicide, Simulating a Crime & Hiding a Cadaver and not abduction? claiming nowhere was it stated that.

It would seem that list of 70 questions came from here [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and was compiled by 'Stella' from MCF.

There's also a reference to it in mccannfiles:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]Was the investigation's direction, homicide, disturbing the political power ... They were made arguidos, this was public, for simulating a crime and hiding a cadaver. ..... And why does one simulate abduction, rather than simply saying that the .... There is a cadaver that has not been located, a conclusion that is ...
mccannfiles.com/id139.html - [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I still believe, that only discrepencies in the statements made by the Tapas 9 would stand up to any scrutiny, or any statments in the files. Newspaper articles are notorious for getting things wrong, and even if they do write verbatim what they have been told, the person can always say I didn't actually say that, they have misunderstood or twisted my words. How many times have we seen the papers have got it wrong, and we have endless "celebrities" denying they ever said things. The same goes for Goncalo Amaral. I am not doubting for a second that what he says is factual and correct, but at the end of the day, we know if he is used as a source, the answer that will come back is, this is only his opinion, and he was removed from the case. We know he has all the facts but I am sure that is what the answer would be. It's an easy get out clause for them to fob us off. For me, it is only the statements, which are actually signed by the witness/arguidos and in some cases videotaped, that will have any real credability. Otherwise I fear we will get fobbed off, as I once did by Tony McNulty from the Home Office, telling me in a letter not to believe everything I read in the papers! and in Mr Amaral's case his book. Just my humble opinion.

candyfloss wrote:I still believe, that only discrepencies in the statements made by the Tapas 9 would stand up to any scrutiny, or any statments in the files. Newspaper articles are notorious for getting things wrong, and even if they do write verbatim what they have been told, the person can always say I didn't actually say that, they have misunderstood or twisted my words. How many times have we seen the papers have got it wrong, and we have endless "celebrities" denying they ever said things. The same goes for Goncalo Amaral. I am not doubting for a second that what he says is factual and correct, but at the end of the day, we know if he is used as a source, the answer that will come back is, this is only his opinion, and he was removed from the case. We know he has all the facts but I am sure that is what the answer would be. It's an easy get out clause for them to fob us off. For me, it is only the statements, which are actually signed by the witness/arguidos and in some cases videotaped, that will have any real credability. Otherwise I fear we will get fobbed off, as I once did by Tony McNulty from the Home Office, telling me in a letter not to believe everything I read in the papers! and in Mr Amaral's case his book. Just my humble opinion.

I'll second that because anything attributed to Amaral, the pros are going to shoot it down.

1,571 signatures - please sign and share for Maddie.

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

It is possible that a crime was commited against the twins as well.   Drugged by an abductor?    There is one little girl (still) missing and 2 siblings possibly drugged.   Three children (potentially) having heinous crimes committed against them.  

That more than deserves a public enquiry imo with all witnesses present on that holiday being called to give evidence.