The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™
Hello!

A very warm welcome to The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ forum.

Please log in, or register to view all the forums, then settle in and help us get to the truth about what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann. Please note that your username should be different from your email address!

When posting please be mindful that this forum is primarily about the death of a three year old girl.

(Please note: if you register with the sole intention of disrupting or spamming, please don't expect to be a member for too long.)

Many thanks,

Jill Havern
Forum owner

Brian Kennedy is 'hands-on', says Clarence Mitchell. But not when it comes to supervising Kevin Kalligen

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Brian Kennedy is 'hands-on', says Clarence Mitchell. But not when it comes to supervising Kevin Kalligen

Post by Tony Bennett on 03.10.10 22:34

This article, by James Millbank, in 'The People', 17 August 2008, is of interest for quite a few reasons.

For one, it was published days after Clarence Mitchell boasted about the 'big boys' of Oakley International, which we all know was not a firm of 'big boys' but of a big-spending, hard-drinking, serial con merchant and fraudster Kevin Halligen.

It was also published only a couple of weeks before Mitchell admitted that Oakley International hadn't lived up to expectations and were going to be dropped, after their contract expired.

The main 'burden' of the article was how greedy, 'grasping' journalist Duarte Levy, erstwhile partner of Joana Morais, had demanded £50,000 for 24 photos said to have been taken by a Spaniard in the 'Tapas restaurant'. The photos were said to show Dr Kate McCann changing her clothes and other discrepancies in the timeline that evening. Levy was ridiculed good and proper in the article, the rest of which I'll add below.

But the bit of the article I want us to focus on for a moment is this:

QUOTE

He also offered The People recordings he claimed to have of the McCanns' financial backer, double-glazing tycoon Brian Kennedy, in a private meeting with Portuguese police.

Mr Mitchell last night said he did not know if Kate changed her clothes and added: "If she did, so what?" He said: "It is no big deal that Mr Kennedy met the police.

"He is interested in all aspects of the investigation. He is a very hands-on person."


UNQUOTE

This meeting between Kennedy and the police we know from the record took place on 13 November 2007, and I believe it was a significant meeting. We also know from the account we have of it by the Portuguese Police that 'representatives of Metodo 3' were there. My guess would be the boss of Metodo 3, Francisco Marco, and his right-hand man.

Note that within a month of this meeting, the Metodo 3 boss was hawking his claims that his men were 'closing in on Madeleine' and she would be 'home by Christmas'.

Why was Kennedy so keen on meeting with the police then? And why did he bring his 'Metodo 3' men along with him - I say 'his' Metodo 3 men because we all know that Kennedy has masterminded and led this whole three year farce of disreputable private investigators.

Of still greater significance I believe was the meeting Kennedy had either that day, or the day before, with:
* Robert Murat and
* Robert Murat's lawyer Francisco Pagarete
* His own in-house lawyer, the McCanns' 'co-ordinating' lawyer, Freemason Edward Smethurst
* Robert Murat's mother, aunt and uncle.

Kennedy was dining with a suspect and two lawyers. What was the real subject of discussion, what was the deal?

Now, if we look at the article again, we see that Duarte levy is offering 'The People' a recording of this tete-a-tete between Kennedy and the Portuguese Police.

Actually, that would I think be fascinating, and of course does not appear amongst the files released by the PJ.

Now we can see also that Clarence Mitchell is forced to react to this claim by levy, and is forced to admit that Brian Kennedy did in fact talk to the PJ.

And Mitchell felt he had to explain this away somehow, and used his skills as a Downing Street 'spinmeister' to do so.

What did he say?

He said; "He is interested in all aspects of the investigation. He is a very hands-on person".

You can say that again!

OK, I will then:

Mitchell: "He is interested in all aspects of the investigation. He is a very hands-on person".

You bet!

How hands-on was Kennedy?

Clarence Mitchell claimed he was 'very' hands-on'.

Was he?

Let's see. He...

* appointed Metodo 3

* appointed Red Defence, Oakley International and Kevin Halligen

* personally recuited private detectives and gave them orders

* bought a house in Knutsford from where he has conducted operations for the past three years

* contacted the Smiths and went to interview Martin Smith in Ireland

* got Gail Cooper and her husband to be interviewed by the lady 'FBI-trained' forensic artist and created a convenient story and some dramatic sketches about the shaggy-haired 'George Harrison man'

* (according to Mark Hollingsworth) intimidated witnesses, some of them so much so that they refused to talk to the PJ

* recruited ex-Cheshire cops Dave Edgar and Arthur Cowley

* organised his private detectives to visit Portugal and Morocco - for what precise purpose remains unclear - often accompanied by his son Patrick Kennedy.

So, was Mitchell right to describe Kennedy as 'hands-on'?

Absolutely.

So, in the light of that impressive record of Kennedy having his hands on just about everything else, what are we to make of Kennedy...

1) failing to supervise Halligen?

2) paying Halligen half a million quid without proper monitoring?

3) not following up a single call from the specially set-up 'hotline' in Virginia, U.S.A.?

4) being totally unaware of Halligen's high-living, hard-drinking lifestyle in London, Oxford and New York.

Let me speak plainly.

Did the notoriously 'hands on' Kennedy, who by the sound of it practically had his hands around the throats of potential witnesses to stop them squealing talking to the police, suddenly become 'hands off' when it came to checking what Halligen was doing for six months?

I will leave my question for others to answer.

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

BELOW: The rest of the 'People' article:


17 August 2008

Maddie McCann's parents are "devastated and furious" over a cruel bid to cash in on their anguish.

Grasping Duarte Levy demanded £50,000 for photographs he claims implicate Kate and Gerry in their daughter's disappearance.

The 23-stone Frenchman said the "dynamite" pictures showed Kate had changed clothes suspiciously the night Maddie vanished.

Despicable Levy also made the ludicrous claim that the 24 photos he was peddling cast doubt on what Gerry and one of the couple's Tapas 7 pals told Portuguese police.

Levy, who said he had close links to the cops, bragged outrageously: "These photos are a bombshell and will force the Maddie case to be re-opened."

The People refused his offers to sell the pictures - and told the McCanns' spokesman Clarence Mitchell of Levy's preposterous claims.

Mr Mitchell branded Levy "a con man and fantastist".

He said: "Kate and Gerry are angry and upset that he is seeking to make money out of Madeleine - it is a disgrace.

"They are no longer suspects and he should not be trying to tarnish their reputation. We thank The People for exposing this man."

A People investigator met Levy in a Brussels hotel last week. Levy said: "I will sell the photos to the highest bidder. I got hold of them through my contacts."

Levy - who is in his 40s and claims to have homes in Spain, Belgium and London - said he had sold pictures and stories about Maddie for tens of thousands of pounds.

He said his new photos showed doctors Kate and Gerry, both 40, dining with their friends in Praia da Luz the night Maddie, then three, disappeared 15 months ago.

Levy claimed that Kate and one of the Tapas 7 changed their clothes.

He also alleged: "The photos were taken between about 8.10pm and 10.15pm and they show that the time lines made by Gerry McCann and another Tapas 7 friend are wrong.

They are dynamite." Levy cruelly scorned Kate and Gerry's belief that Maddie is still alive. He said: "I believe she died in that room during an accident and then her body was moved to a flat in the town where it was kept in a freezer."

The claim is categorically denied by the McCanns and police produced no evidence to support the theory. Levy said the pictures were taken by a Spanish tourist whose camera was later stolen.

He claimed a police source tipped him off after officers found the camera, which he then bought legally.

Levy also tried to convince The People that a well-known British legal firm offered him 600,000 euros (£512,800) for the photographs.

Bizarrely, he said he refused because the lawyers would not agree to his demand that the police should have copies of the pictures.

Read more:

http://justathoughtyouknow.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=guests&action=display&thread=388&page=230#ixzz11KcIjwMV
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Brian Kennedy is 'hands-on', says Clarence Mitchell. But not when it comes to supervising Kevin Kalligen

Post by Irish Eyes on 03.10.10 23:04

Why is a double glazing tycoon so important in the disappearance of Madeleine and what happened to the 24 photos Levy had?
avatar
Irish Eyes

Posts : 101
Reputation : 0
Join date : 2010-04-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Brian Kennedy is 'hands-on', says Clarence Mitchell. But not when it comes to supervising Kevin Kalligen

Post by maebee on 03.10.10 23:15

Levy has been caught out in many lies but there's one of his statements I'd agree with :

"I believe she died in that room "
Sad

avatar
maebee
Madeleine Foundation

Posts : 488
Reputation : 86
Join date : 2009-12-03
Location : Ireland

Back to top Go down

Re: Brian Kennedy is 'hands-on', says Clarence Mitchell. But not when it comes to supervising Kevin Kalligen

Post by Tony Bennett on 03.10.10 23:17

@Irish Eyes wrote:Why is a double glazing tycoon so important in the disappearance of Madeleine?

REPLY: He has made himself very important in this case - for what precise reasons we have yet to find out. He says it is all because he has a compassionate and a generous heart. I am not convinced about that

...and what happened to the 24 photos Levy had?

REPLY: Sorry, no idea, can't help you with that one
avatar
Tony Bennett

Posts : 14663
Reputation : 2801
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 69
Location : Shropshire

Back to top Go down

Re: Brian Kennedy is 'hands-on', says Clarence Mitchell. But not when it comes to supervising Kevin Kalligen

Post by aiyoyo on 04.10.10 2:47

The pertinent point here is:

Even granting him his self-claimed virtues, why did he go the extent of orchestrating and personally handling activities that put him at risk of legal repercussions?
Is that normal for any supporter to do even given his overzealous mentality - ie to ignore the legitimacy reason behind his actions, and legal implications of his hands-on activities.

If the mccanns ratified his activities then it reflects very negatively on the mccanns in that they were knowingly (albeit in these instances indirectly) interfering with investigations.
If they didnt endorse his activities, what hold did he have on them that they could not put a stop to it? Could it be because they were dependent on his financial support?

So far people are in the dark where the finance for those trips came from?
Did he pay out of his own pocket or was his activities paid out of the fund?
In the case of the latter, the public have a right to know why the mccanns main supporter was interfering in an investigation process fully endorsed by the mccanns, as confirmed by their porte-parole CM.

Did his actions go beyond plain supporter role? It definitely appear so!
What drove his ambition and motivation to bend backwards for the mccanns?

On the premise he went to the PJ to provide info or to seek info, then that begs the question:
why didnt he go to the Leicestershire Constabulary? Wouldnt it be more natural to go to the UK police for that? After all LP was supposedly working with the PJ or were they after the mccanns fled home?



avatar
aiyoyo

Posts : 9611
Reputation : 319
Join date : 2009-11-28

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top


 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum