Retrospection: CMOMM from the beginning to the end

From the very beginning, May 2007, the case of missing  Madeleine McCann has been widely discussed across mainstream and social media, starting with a few discussion forums on press organs and privately owned fora and blog.

Over the years they have come and gone, leaving but a remnant of former interest in the case.  Some abandoned by the hosts and some just faded away through lack of interest,  when the press is saturated with nonsense stories who can blame people for losing interest.

There is however one platform that continues to fight for Madeleine McCann's right for justice .... The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann!

The forum has been through a lot since first established by the owner Jill Havern, good times and bad times, yet we are still here.  An evil force purporting to be on the side of justice has repeatedly tried to destroy this forum but we as a united force have weathered the storms and I hope will continue so to do until interest is totally exhausted.  Even then the forum leaves a legacy in the name of Madeleine McCann so all is not lost, nor ever will be.

With the fifteenth anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance fast approaching, this is a good time to reflect on CMOMM's history - all the good work achieved by so many good people with no hidden agenda, no bugle parping for self aggrandizement or monetizing.  Our only interest is Madeleine McCann.

Please .... let's take this opportunity to highlight all the work this forum can be proud to own over the past 13 years - almost as long as the case itself but that can be enlarged by associated connections like the Madeleine Foundation, most certainly not to be confused with the Find  Madeleine Fund !!!

I'll start by reminding folk of this..

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15108-a-brief-history-of-the-cmomm-forum-a-collection-of-activists-and-investigators#385295

Don't be shy, feel free to add but I only ask that you keep on topic.

There was a lot I hadn't read, in the 'brief history of the CMOMM Forum. I was appalled at Dick's remark - ' we'll see where the case goes'. What a disgustingly cavalier attitude.

I feel the same.

I believe CMOMM can take a degree of credit for the works of Richard D Hall - self explanatory by the video content..

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15992-richard-d-hall-madeleine-mccann-videos-complete-works#400552

First posted-up only three years ago, this gives a good broad summary of the function and vision of the forum. Thus for the benefit of new members, long term members who still haven't managed to circumnavigate every nook and crannie and not forgetting old timers who maybe have got a bit foggy.



In this section of CMOMM, we present the research work of the Madeleine McCann Research group (MMRG) launched today on, what many of us believe is, the real 12th anniversary of Madeleine's 'disappearance'.

MMRG was set up several years ago to bring together the best of original research on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. The group includes many CMOMM members.

MMRG supports the overall conclusion of the Portuguese Police (PJ) and Gonçalo Amaral, namely that Madeleine died in her parents’ apartment, and that there has been a cover-up of the true facts of her death by the McCanns, their Tapas 7 friends, and by government security services. However, through patient research by the group, and using the best research by others, MMRG respectfully disagrees with the PJ’s conclusion that Madeleine died from an accident after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007, the day Madeleine was reported missing. MMRG’s belief is that Madeleine died much earlier that week. Many facts have emerged during the past 12 years that MMRG now believes are wholly inconsistent with her death on 3 May.

In this section we will also bring back to CMOMM the best of the original research carried out by the Madeleine Foundation before 2013 by revisiting - updating and re-working - many of the detailed research articles published by the Madeleine Foundation between 2008 and 2012. Many of these had to be withdrawn because of libel action by the McCanns, using top libel lawyers Carter-Ruck, who describe themselves as 'Britain's most feared libel lawyers'. Please bookmark this section and return here as the section fills with detailed articles on subjects rarely tackled elsewhere.

* * * * *

Please note that this new forum is a read-only Reference Forum - comments are not allowed - but should anyone wish to discuss anything, or bring to our attention any discrepancies, that is posted in this section then you can do so by following the link to the original thread, where appropriate, that will be posted at the end of the articles.

Please also bear in mind that this new forum is under construction and will be continually developed and updated. It is my wish, as forum owner, that this new section will be the most important for CMOMM as we showcase just how pro-active we've been over the years in our desire to seek justice for Madeleine McCann.

* * * * *

To give you an idea of what I'm aiming to achieve with this new forum it might be an idea for me to explain its purpose.

First of all CMOMM is the main forum, but this new forum is designed completely differently and it is a Forum within a Forum and it is about the MMRG so it has an initial Category named ''CMOMM & MMRG 10 Years On' and then it has Forums and Sub-forums (MMRG). For established members you will be aware of CMOMM's work, but new members will not be aware of how CMOMM came to be, what we have done so far, and what we aim to achieve with our sub-research group (MMRG).

Its layout is this - and as you can see from the Table of Contents, its potential is just as vast as CMOMM itself:

Table of Contents (links are clickable):
A work in progress

Category:
CMOMM 10 Years On

Forum: Our Mission
Sub-forums:
About our researchers, campaigners, authors etc.

How it all began

Forum: The accomplishments of CMOMM and its members
Sub-forums:
Public awareness
Petitions
Campaigns for justice

Forum: Publications
Sub-forums:
PeterMac's FREE eBook
Gonçalo Amaral: The Truth of the Lie (English version)

Forum: Leaflets
Sub-forums:
Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG) - 50 Facts Leaflets
Madeleine Foundation Leaflets

Forum: Articles
Sub-forums:
The Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG) - Articles
Tony Bennett
Portuguese journalist Paul Reis
Ex-pat journalist Natasha Donn, editor Portugal Resident

Forum:
Blogs

Forum:
CMOMM on Google+

Forum: Videos, Films and Documentaries
Sub-forums:
Richard D. Hall (Buried by Mainstream Media)
Joana Morais (xklamation)
Spudgun
HiDeHo
Podcasts featuring MMRG members
CMOMM members videos

Forum: Research
Sub-forums:
Official documents
Correspondence

FOI Requests and Responses

Forum: Evidence obtained
Sub-forums:
The weather in Praia da Luz
Photographs
The creche records
The phone records
Catriona Baker
Mrs Pamela Fenn and Carole Tranmer
Robert Murat
The Smith sighting that never was
No evidence that Madeleine was seen after Sunday 29th April 2007
The unusual behaviour of the the McCanns
Rebuttal of The McCanns (and T7s) attempts to claim Madeleine was alive on Thursday 3rd May 2007

Forum: Our evidence submitted to the Portuguese Attorney-General

Forum: The conclusions of CMOMM researchers and associates

Forum: Going forward

Where is the source that this did spring from .... must be the vernal equinox ..

WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO MADELEINE MCCANN?  - WAS SHE KILLED ON SUNDAY 29 APRIL?

The views of the Madeleine McCann Research Group, August 2016

The Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG) was set up in 2009, around the time that Jill Havern set up what was to become the most popular Madeleine McCann discussion forum on the internet: ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’ (CMOMM).

Seven years later, we are just two months away from the likely closure of Scotland Yard’s investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance, known as Operation Grange.

Many were hopeful that this investigation, begun in May 2011, would lead to the truth about Madeleine’s disappearance being established, and to the arrest and conviction of the persons responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance.  

These hopes have been dashed.

Over the past seven years, MMRG members have contributed to the vast amount of research that has been pursued on CMOMM, and our publications have been published  there.

We have seen many fine researchers come and go on the forum. Some of  those who have followed the Madeleine McCann for years have begun to despair of the truth ever being discovered, while other forum members have complained of ‘going over the same minutiae over and over again and getting nowhere’.

This is emphatically not how we see it. On the contrary, since the astonishing BBC Crimewatch programme in October 2013, which was yet one more recycling of the same old McCann Team’s account of how Madeleine was allegedly abducted, there has been renewed interest in the forum and some very productive research carried out, in which we have played our part.

We feel we are now able to set out some key findings about what really happened to Madeleine McCann. In doing so, we are supported to a greater or lesser degree by many of the finest researchers, both on the forum and elsewhere, into matters related to Madeleine’s disappearance.

In this short paper, we set out our key findings and the reasons for them. We also try to deal head-on with the main objections to our theory.

We adopt as an excellent summaries of the main lines of evidence: (1) the interim Portuguese police report of Tavares de Almeida dated 10 September 2007 and (2) the book ’The Truth of the Lie’ published in July 2008 by Dr Goncalo Amaral.

However, and with the very greatest respect, the force of evidence means that we must part company with them on the date of Madeleine’s death, which they say occurred within four hours of her being reported missing. We explain in this paper why it must have been earlier.    

We believe that there are a considerable number of people who know what really happened to Madeleine but will not speak of what they know. Until they do speak, we will never know everything. But we believe we now have sufficient knowledge to be able to state with confidence what we say below. That knowledge is derived from multiple sources and is based on the voluntary efforts of many people, not least those who have set up websites of information and discussion about the case, voluntary Portuguese- English translators and so many ofhers who have given freely of their time and expertise  

Our views are unlikely to change unless significant new evidence emerges.

The claim that Madeleine was killed - and killed days before the McCanns reported Madeleine was abducted - has been very starkly set out in the third of three films by film-maker Richard D Hall: ‘When Madeleine Died?’. We agree with the central claims of his films and now wish to add our conclusions on where the evidence leads. Here they are:

1.   Madeleine was killed

The 17 alerts by two cadaver dogs, used by dog top handler Martin Grime, to the odour of a corpse and blood or body fluids, in locations associated with the McCanns or on their clothes, is prima facie evidence that Madeleine died or was killed in the McCanns’ holiday apartment. No-one else was reported to have died in that apartment. That conclusion is greatly enhanced by the McCanns’ first - and subsequent - reactions to these dramatic findings.

The initial DNA samples taken from the body fluids discovered in the McCanns’ apartment and in their car showed a 99.99% certainty that they belonged to Madeleine  McCann. However, a subsequent review of the samples determined that they had been ‘contaminated’ by government Forensic Science Service staff. They then said that the samples could have been from Madeleine but also that this could not be stated with any certainty.    

The conclusion that Madeleine was killed is also strongly supported by a wealth of circumstantial evidence in the form of a swathe of contradictory statements and changes of story by the McCanns, their friends, and others closely associated with them. She was therefore NOT abducted.  

To even list, let alone explain, all the circumstantial evidence would take pages. It includes such things as

A Kate McCann’s refusal in an interview under caution to answer any one of 48 questions put to her by the police

B Spending vast sums of money - much of it from the public - on expensive lawyers and PR advisers, when none of this could have realistically helped to find Madeleine

C The McCanns’ body language, including their obvious lack of raw emotion after the loss of their first child

D  Analysis of their statements, which inadvertently reveal many clues about  what really happened to Madeleine

E The huge involvement of the government and security services in this case

F The appointment by Tony Blair of his most senior PR officer, Clarence Mitchell, the Director of the Media Monitoring Unit at the Central Office of Information, and responsible directly to the Cabinet Office, to head up the government’s PR iniative in support of the McCanns. He once boasted that his job was to ‘control what comes out in the media’.

G The McCanns refusing to give their holiday photos to the police. Instead, they used the Head of Risks at PR company Bell Pottinger, Alex Woolfall, and their cousin, Michael Wright, to edit, crop and delete photographs from the memory cards before they were given to the police. They refused to hand over their photographs without first selecting exactly what they wanted the police to see and what they didn’t want then to see

H Employing disreputable and dishonest private investigation agencies, such as Metodo 3 and Oakley International. Some of the men the McCanns employed were out-and-out crooks, like Kevin Halligen and Antonio Giminez Raso, both of whom spent four years in jail for crimes, respectively, of fraud and corruptly assisting a major drugs gang.

I Arranging two bogus week-long searches of a dam in Portugal, pretending that they knew nothing about this search, when in fact they had paid a lawyer, Marcos Aragao Correia and men form Metodo 3 to conduct the search.          

J Deliberately creating stories about claimed ‘sightings’ of Madeleine which they knew to be false.

K Planning events to mark Madeleine’s disappearance far in advance …


2.   How was Madeleine killed?        

We cannot say. However, in our view it could not have been a simple accident, otherwise the McCanns would have taken her to the local hospital.

We suggest, given what we know, that there are two realistic possibilities:

[*]a deliberate violent act against her (not necessarily by one of the McCanns) , or

[*]death due harmful medicine or drugs.
There are indications which point in either of these directions, but not enough information to say which..      


3.   Madeleine could not have been killed after 6pm on Thursday 3 May

Tavares de Almeida and Goncalo Amaral suggested Madeleine might have had a fall and been killed as a result of that fall - after 6pm on Thursday 3 May. But those who claim that Madeleine died after 6pm have to explain how the McCanns were able to do all the following – and more - within the four hours between 6pm and 10pm (when the alarm was raised) on Thursday 3 May.


   decided not to inform the authorities of her death

   planned to remove her body from the apartment

   got Madeleine’s twin brother and sister out of the way when all of this was going on (Note: those who say Madeleine died after 6pm never seem to discuss whether the twins knew she had died and how the McCanns kept them out of the way)

   told their Tapas 7 friends what had happened

   somehow carried Madeleine’s body out of their apartment

   found, within a miraculously short space of time, a place to hide her body

   successfully hid her body in a place where no-one has ever found it

   sat down calmly for dinner at about 8.30pm to 8.45pm as if nothing had happened.
   In addition, for Martin Grime’s cadaver dogs to have alerted to the scent of a corpse, no longer present, some three months after the McCanns had vacated their holiday apartment, Madeleine’s body must have been lying in the McCanns’ apartment for at least 90 minutes, probably two hours or longer .


4.   What indications do we have about when she was killed?

This issue was very fully addressed in Richard D. Hall’s third film about Madeleine McCann: ‘When Madeleine Died?’  Without necessarily agreeing with every specific point he makes in that documentary, we adopt his main conclusions, so far as they go.  The following are some of the main factual issues we have taken into consideration in arriving at our conclusion that Madeleine McCann was killed on Sunday 29 April:

[*] The complete absence of any of Madeleine’s DNA in Praia da Luz                              
No DNA of Madeleine was found in the McCanns’ apartment, nor on her clothes nor on objects she had used or come into contact with on holiday, e.g. towel, pillow, bedding, hairbrush and toothbrush. This is consistent with her having been dead for some time before she was reported missing. It would also be consistent with the apartment having been forensically cleansed before the alarm was raised and Madeleine’s clothes and other items having been removed or disposed of.

[*]The absence of any genuine photographs of Madeleine taken after lunchtime on Sunday 29 April (see also below)
We know for certain that three photographs were taken of Madeleine playing happily in the Ocean Club playground in Praia da Luz in the late afternoon or early evening of the first day of the McCanns’ holiday - Saturday 28 April (this disposes of the views of some people who have claimed that Madeleine was never on that holiday). There is good evidence that the so-called ‘Last Photo’ of Madeleine was taken at lunchtime on Sunday 29 April and not at lunchtime on Thursday 3 May as claimed by the McCanns. Only one other photo of Madeleine was taken that week, the so-called ‘Tennis Balls Photo’. There is real doubt as to whether that is a genuine photo of Madeleine.

[*]Severe doubts about the evidence given by the McCanns and two Mark Warner creche nannies, Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington, regarding a ‘high tea’ at around 5pm-6pm, which Madeleine is said to have attended on Thursday 3 May
It was the strong conviction of Dr Goncalo Amaral and his team of investigators that, based largely on the evidence of Catriona Baker, Madeleine was alive and present at a high tea at the Tapas restaurant on 3 May 2007.  Catriona Baker was in sole charge of the ‘Lobsters’ creche of seven children (including Madeleine) the week the McCanns were in Praia da Luz.
Amaral and his team (rightly) rejected all claims by the McCanns that Madeleine was alive after 6pm on 3 May because, obviously, they were made by someone who was not ‘independent’. He and his team also (rightly) rejected claims by Dr David Payne that he saw all three of the McCanns’ children alive on a visit he and Kate McCann said that he had made to the McCanns’ apartment at about 6.30pm on 3 May. Not only was Dr Payne not independent, being a very close friend of the McCanns, but there were 20 or more significant contradictions between the accounts of Dr Payne and Kate McCann about what took place at that meeting, how long it lasted etc.  
We do not set out here all the multiple contradictions about the alleged ‘high tea’ on 3 May; these have been more than adequately analysed in many places on the internet. We are sure that this ’high tea’ did not take place; the contradictions about it are too many and too serious.
All other claimed sightings of Madeleine on 3 May are equally unproven and open to serious doubt.          

[*]The absence of any undisputed confirmed sightings of Madeleine on or after Monday 30 April  
Here we rely mainly on the analyses by long-time McCann researcher ‘HideHo’, who has examined all claimed sightings of Madeleine from Monday onwards, and found each one to be either vague, otherwise unsubstantiated or uncorroborated, or subject to contradictory  evidence. We refer in particular to her article on CMOMM on the lack of credible evidence that Madeleine was seen alive after Sunday, link here:
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11921-was-madeleine-seen-after-sunday-no-credible-evidence-that-she-was-watch-the-video?


[*]Multiple contradictions and inconsistencies in the accounts of the McCanns and their friends about  the events of that week from Monday onwards
This was confirmed in Kate McCann’s own book on the events of that week, which did nothing to remove all the question marks about the many contradictions and inconsistencies about what really happened that week. These have been fully analysed on CMOMM over the past few years.  

[*]The unconvincing and vague evidence given by creche nanny Catriona Baker about what Madeleine was actually doing in the crèche all week
Her accounts lack any real detail of what Madeleine actually did in the creche that week. Besides that, the times shown for Madeleine being in the creche do not even agree with what Kate McCann says in her own book about the events of that week.

[*]Clear evidence that the McCanns’ pattern of behaviour changed after Sunday in the following ways:


   Taking breakfast every day in their own apartment and not with their friends in the restaurant

   Similarly, taking lunch every day in their own apartment and not with their friends in the restaurant

   Never being seen out together with the twins from Monday onwards

   The McCanns using different doors when entering and leaving their apartment.


All of these, we say, are wholly consistent with something very serious having happened to Madeleine McCann on the Sunday.

[*]The problem with the ‘Tennis Balls Photo’
The ‘Tennis Balls Photo’ purports to be a photograph of Madeleine collecting tennis balls from a tennis court where adults have just been playing tennis. It is said to prove that she was alive and well on the Tuesday that week. There are however multiple problems with the authenticity of this photo. Not least is the fact that it is claimed not only that two different people took the photo, but also that it was taken on two different days. Other problems with the photo have been discussed in many places on the internet. We do not therefore accept it as evidence that Madeleine was alive on Tuesday.        

[*]Evidence that the children of the McCanns and their friends were cared for in one room from Sunday night onwards
After Dr Amaral was removed as the investigation co-ordinator in October 2007, he was replaced by Paulo Rebelo. On    he stated that there was evidence that the McCanns and their friends had not been checking on their children regularly each night as claimed, but that their eight children were all being cared for in one of their friends’ apartments each night. Support for this claim was found when it became clear that every night from Sunday  to Thursday, one or other adult had not been at the Tapas restaurant for dinner each night (see below), either because one of the adults or one of the children was said to be ill.

[*]Photographs taken of Madeleine’s pyjamas – before 3 May - in Praia da Luz, and the mystery of the ‘brown tea stain’
We refer here to a masterly study of issues concerning Madeleine’s pyjamas by Dr Martin Roberts. In his analysis, Dr Roberts publishes disturbing evidence that Madeleine’s pyjamas may have been photographed on a blue hessian background, similar to that of the settee in the McCanns’ apartment, earlier during the day (3w May) when the alarm about Madeleine was raised. He notes, as Kate McCann herself admits, that she washed Madeleine’s pyjamas on the morning of 3 May. He queries, as many others have done, why anyone would need to wash a minor ‘tea stain’ off a pair of pyjamas just two days before the McCanns were due to return home. Most people going on a week’s holiday don’t plan on washing clothes. Dr Roberts’ article carefully analyses a series of photos of Madeleine’s pyjamas published after she was reported missing in which he demonstrates that these photos of Madeleine’s pyjamas were taken inside the McCanns’ own apartment and while the pyjamas were drying. Rightly, Dr Roberts queries what was the point of the McCanns taking these photographs. We agree with his explanation, which can be viewed here:
‘Washed Up’ article:     http://www.mccannfiles.com/id400.html
‘A Nightwear Job’: http://onlyinamericablogging.blogspot.com/2016/03/a-nightwear-job-by-dr-martin-roberts.html


5.    Specific indications that Madeleine was killed on Sunday 29 April

We have set out why we believe that Madeleine was killed, and why she could not have been killed after 6pm on Thursday 3 May as claimed by Portuguese detectives. We have given, above, some general considerations as to when Madeleine may have been killed. It is time for us now to be still more specific about why we think she was killed on the Sunday that week. Here are our main reasons:


   The change of routines from Sunday night onwards and the absence of independent and corroborated ‘sightings’ of Madeleine from then onwards (see above)

   The probable forgery of the ‘Last Photo’


The ‘Last Photo’ shows Gerry McCann, Madeleine and her sister Amelie by the Ocean Club swimming pool. The McCanns say the photo was taken at 2.29pm on Thursday 3 May. However, we are persuaded, largely by evidence on the two ‘Last Photo’ threads on CMOMM, that the Last Photo was taken at lunchtime on Sunday 29 April. A raft of evidence, but especially comparative weather records for the week, point in that direction. There is no other photo of Madeleine which with certainty can be said to have been taken after then, which we regard as hugely significant.                


   The absence of confirmed photos of Madeleine on the holiday from the ‘Last Photo’ onwards


This points us in the direction of Madeleine having to serious harm shortly after that photo was taken.    

[*]The involvement of Robert Murat    

In our view the involvement of Robert Murat in this case is another significant pointer to Madeleine having been killed on the Sunday. Here are the relevant considerations we have in mind regarding Murat’s involvement

[*]There is evidence that he and Gerry McCann may have known each other before the McCanns’ holiday in Praia da Luz in 2007

[*]Robert Murat was a well-known long-term resident of Praia da Luz, his mother having lived there for much of her life

[*]He was living in England (Devon) when the McCanns went on holiday to Praia da Luz in 2007

[*]On Monday 30 April, he was hastily summoned  to Portugal, allegedly by his girlfriend, but possibly by others - Murat’s account of the ‘phone call or calls that led him to take a hasty flight to Portugal is not convincing

[*]He took the early morning flight to Faro, Portugal from Exeter at 7am the very next day, Tuesday 1 May

[*]When he was asked at an interview under caution in Portugal on 15 May 2007 what he had been doing in Portugal during his first four days there (1-4 May), he lied about his actions in at least 17 material respects. Later, when re-interviewed by the Portuguese police on 10 and 11 July, after police had interrogated his mobile ’phone, he completely changed his story, claiming he had been ‘too tired’ on 15 May to tell the truth. What possible good excuse could there be for lying so many times about the fate of a missing child?

[*]There is evidence that the British Embassy in Portugal arranged for Murat to become the main translator for the Portuguese police in the days following Madeleine being reported missing. Quite why the British Embassy would promote Murat to do this job is uncertain, unless he had a significant prior connection with the Embassy

[*]His conduct whilst a translator in those early days after Madeleine was reported missing was bizarre and suspicious. He was observed trying to sneak a look at confidential documents. He kept pestering the police with plausible suggestions about lines of enquiry that they should be following. His conduct during his translations was so outrageous that an inspector sent an urgent report to Dr Amaral, following which Murat was swiftly removed as a translator.
         These and a number of other considerations about Robert Murat lead us to think that he was summoned to Portugal during Monday 30 April because something serious had happened to Madeleine the previous day, and that his help was needed to cover this up


[*]The ‘Make-Up Photo

A very strange photo of Madeleine was published two years after Madeleine was reported missing. It appeared in a short film made by Madeleine’s godfather, film-maker Jon Corner. It showed Madeleine in make-up. She had had blue eye shadow put on her. She had a gold-coloured necklace put around her neck. She had a hair bead on her. The McCanns claimed she had been ‘playing with Mummy’s make-up box’, but that story didn’t stand up to scrutiny. There was evidence that the photo was not taken in England as claimed, but in Portugal. A comparison was made between the Last Photo and the Make-Up Photo. On both, Madeleine was wearing a hair bead. On both, her hair length was the same. In the Last Photo, which appears to have been taken on Sunday, she was happy and obviously smiling at something that amused her. But in the Make-Up Photo, she was looking sad, even miserable. We think there are good grounds for suspecting that the two photos may have been taken on the same day, and that Madeleine’s sad, miserable appearance could be connected in some way to her having been killed later that same day.  

6.   Evidence  that an abduction hoax was planned over a period of four days                

It follows from all that we have said above that, if Madeleine was indeed killed on Sunday 29 April, those who knew she had been killed must have carefully planned an audacious hoax, so cunning and clever that most people still believe that she was abducted. Here, quite apart from the matters dealt with above, are several other specific indications that an abduction hoax was indeed planned over a four-day period:

[*]The presence of the Director (and his deputy) of a Bell Pottinger subsidiary company - the PR company, Resonate - in Praia da Luz during the days before the alarm was raised
The relevant facts are these. Immediately following the reported disappearance of Madeleine, the holiday company who arranged the holiday, Mark Warner, brought their PR company, Bell Pottinger, to Praia da Luz. Its Head of Risk, Alex Woolfall flew there the very next day (4 May) and was later joined by another top Director of the company. But it later emerged that the Director and his deputy from a Bell Pottinger subsidiary company, Resonate, had flown to help Mark Warner just days before, possibly on Monday 30 April. No satisfactory explanation for this has ever been provided. Were they sent ahead of Bell Pottinger as a kind of advance party because something serious had already happened to Madeleine?  (The McCanns paid the amazing sum of £500,000 to keep Madeleine’s name on the front pages of Britain’s newspapers. That money appears to have come from donations made by the general public.              

[*]The conduct of Nuno Lourenco
On Friday 4 May, the McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner gave a description of a man she said she had seen carrying as child at 9.15pm on the night Madeleine was reported missing. She described a man of medium height, with long black hair, wearing cloth clothes and classic shoes, who ‘didn’t look like a tourist’. The very next day, early in the morning, a man called Nuno Lourenco rang the Portuguese police and said that, six days previoulsy, a man had tried to kidnap his child at a tiny village called Sagres. He described the man as ‘of medium height, with long black hair, wearing cloth clothes and classic shoes, who ‘didn’t look like a tourist’.’ The Portuguese police became convinced that this must be the man whom Jane Tannner’s evidence suggested  had abducted Madeleine. Lourenco supplied the police with a photograph he said he had taken of the man’s car. From this, the police were able to trace the man who was driving the car. It was Wojchiech Krokowski, a man from Poland on holiday with his wife for the week. When examined in detail, Lourenco’s claim that his daughter was nearly kidnapped by Krokowski falls apart. Quite apart from anything else, why did he delay for six days reporting a man taking photos of children on a beach and who later that day tried to kidnap his daughter? Lourenco had evidently planned to call the police and already knew of the description that Jane Tanner had given to the police. This suggests that Lourenco was part of a group of people who planned to deliberately sabotage the Portuguese police’s investigation and send them off in entirely the wrong direction. He had carefully ’fitted up’ Krokowski.

[*]Hairs of the same haplotype as Robert Murat and Jane Tanner found in Krokowski’s apartment
Further to the above point, hairs of the same haplotype as Robert Murat and Jane Tanner were found at Krokowski’s apartment when it was searched by the police. Whilst this doesn’t prove that Jane Tanner and Robert Murat were in Krokowski’s apartment that week, it certainly raises at least the possibility that they were. Was there a meeting of some kind there that week? Is that when Jane Tanner was briefed to give a description of Krokowski when she was questioned by the Portuguese police?            

[*]The strange booking on Sunday night of the Tapas restaurant  for the evening meal of Tapas 7 all week
This booking appears to have been made on the Sunday night. There are two different versions of who made the booking, which in itself is strange. The reason given by the McCanns an d their friends for making this booking is even stranger; they claimed that they were leaving their children on their own and checking on them but wanted to be able to see their apartment from the restaurant.  This was meaningless. The children were sleeping at the back of their apartment, so there was nothing for them to see from the Tapas restaurant. All kinds of dangers could have befallen the children while the parents were absent  It is our view that the booking of the Tapas restaurant may well have been connected in some way with Madeleine already being dead or having suffered a fatal injury. This seems to be where the story of the McCanns checking the children every half-hour seems to have originated. The claim that the McCanns and their friends were checking their children regularly that week has not been corroborated; indeed the evidence points to their children all being cared for by one of the group each night.

[*]The damage done to the shutters by Gerry McCann on the Sunday or Monday morning
Repairs to the shutters of the McCanns’ apartment were needed on the Monday; Ocean Club staff came to mend them that day. We find this a curious incident. Is it possible that the McCanns and advisers were already planning to claim that the shutters had been jemmied open and smashed by the abductor? (as indeed they did claim, on Thursday).  If so, they would need to demonstrate that the shutters were previously in good working order.    

[*]Evidence that a group planned in advance how to create a major news story on the morning of Friday 4 May
It is a fact that from about 8am on Friday 4 May, the news of Madeleine’s reported disappearance rapidly became the top story in both Portugal and Britain for weeks – and has continued to make international headlines ever since. Was this an accident? We do not think it was. On the very night when the McCanns and their friends should have been distraught , following Madeleine’s sudden disappearance, some of them were busy contacting the TV and print media and claiming, even in the very first hours after they had raised the alarm, that the Portuguese police were incompetent and not organising a proper search for her. The McCanns seemed to know influential people in the TV media and were successful in getting news about Madeleine’s disappearance on to the early Friday morning bulletins. It was very early on, but that on that very Friday, many of the media immediately despatched reporters to Praia da Luz – even though, of course, Madeleine could well have been found alive, safe and well later that very day. What was it that galvanised them all into sending reporters there so soon? One example illustrates our point. An ex-pat living in Spain. Jon Clarke had created a successful newspaper for ex-pats, the Olive Press. He was contacted by one of Britain’s mainstream press in the early hours of the morning, before the media storm broke at about 8am on the Friday morning. Although it was a five-hour journey from his cottage in the countryside around Ronda, he managed to reach Praia da Luz before mid-day, boasting that he was ‘one of the first journalists on the spot. How did his editor in Britain know so early that this was going to be a major international story?

7.   The main objections to our theory

[*]Nobody could keep up the pretence that their daughter had been abducted - knowing that she was dead - for so long
ANSWER: It has happened many times before in many other similar cases.

[*]Too many people would know that Madeleine had died on Sunday and by now, someone would have broken ranks and revealed the truth
ANWSER: Again there are many instances in history where large groups of people who know about a serious crime work together to keep the crime a secret. To give but one recent example, dozens of people including police and celebrities knew that Jimmy Savile was a paedophile. But they kept silent. No-ne knew until this year that Clement Freud – who twice invited the McCanns to his Praia da Luz home for eats and drinks in the weeks that followed Madeleine’s disappearance - had been a serial paedophile for decades.    

[*]There are too many sightings of Madeleine all week; they can’t all be mistaken
ANSWER: Look at the analysis of these sightings by HideHo that we referred to above.

[*]Mrs Fenn heard Madeleine crying between 10.30pm and 11.45pm on Tuesday night
We reject her evidence for several reasons. She did not make her statement until 20 August - over three-and-a-half months after the event. No-one else heard a child crying loudly for 75 minutes that night. She said she spoke to a friend of hers while the crying was going on, but neither of them did anything about it. Her statement was trailed in advance in the British press in articles which showed every sign of being planted by the McCann Team’s PR agent, Clarence Mitchell. She claimed in her statement that the crying she heard was that of a child ‘more than two’ - but no-one can distinguish between the cry of a two-year-old (the McCanns’ twins) and three-year-old (Madeleine). In short, there is evidence that her statement was fabricated          

Madeleine McCann Research Group, August 2016

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t16144-the-views-of-the-madeleine-mccann-research-group-august-2016#400769

For discussion, please visit this thread: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14249-what-really-happened-to-madeleine-mccann-was-she-killed-on-sunday-29-april

A very timely reminder - lest we forget..

If Madeleine McCann died on Sunday 29 April, what was really going on behind the scenes that week?

There are a great many indications that Madeleine was not alive after Sunday 29 April, which have been discussed on CMOMM and elsewhere, notably the films of Richard D Hall and the ebook by PeterMac.

If Madeleine McCann did die on Sunday 29 April, then, very obviously, there must have been a carefully constructed plan to deceive the police and the world that Madeleine had been abducted.

The theory of Goncalo Amaral and the Portuguese Police is this. They believed that Madeleine was at a 'high tea' with her parents and that Catriona Baker, a children's nanny, and the McCanns, were enjoying a 'high tea' together at the Tapas restaurant, until after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May. This theory requires the following to be believed; namely that:

1. Madeleine died some time after 5.30pm that evening
2. If she was badly hurt or unconscious, that they tried to treat or revive her
3. If the twins were present or nearby, the McCanns would have moved them out of the way whilst they decided what to do
4. (Once sure that she was dead) they presumably considered whether they should report her death to the authorities
5. Decided not to do so
6. Got over the initial shock
7. Hid Madeleine from view whilst they considered what to do
8. Cleaned up e.g. if there was any blood
9. May have washed the curtains
10. Arranged to disposed of any evidence
11. Deleted messages on their mobile 'phones1
12. Contacted some or all of their Tapas 7 friends to see if they would co-operate with a faked abduction

13. Got every single one of them (with the possible exception of Dianne Webster) to agree with them
14. Put the children calmly to bed
15. Got dressed for dinner
16. Both ate with their friends at the Tapas restaurant, from 8.30pm to 10pm, with only short interludes for 'checking'
17. Moved and hid the body so well that it was never found, and, finally
18. Staged an abduction.

Manifestly this was impossible.

The purpose of this new thread therefore - if this was indeed a planned hoax abduction as some believe - is to discuss how such an audacious and successful plan might, or could, have been put together, to explore various possibilities and theories, and to consider some of the people who are likely to have been involved in the planning and execution of such a hoax.

The primary focus is intended to be on all the hidden actions of various actors that might have taken place before 10pm Thursday 3 May 2007, rather than (if this was a cover-up) to dwell on all of what happened after that date.

The key questions, then, are:

Who was involved?

What did they do?

When did they do it?

Why did they do it?

See also the OP on this thread for some related ideas:
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14970-possible-timeline-discuss

Below is a background for discussion

BACKGROUND

In the MMRG’s Letter to Portugal dated 28 February 2018, which was sent to the then Portuguese Attorney-General and forwarded by her to the Portuguese Police, these main lines of evidence pointing to Madeleine’s death on Sunday 29 April 2007 – four days before she was officially reported missing – were listed:

A. A large number of false statements made at the outset, containing a huge amount of fabricated evidence

(These included, for example:
(i) The wholly contradictory accounts of an alleged meeting between David Payne and Kate McCann around 6.30pm on Thursday 3 May which suggest that such a meeting never happened
(ii) Jane Tanner’s numerous changes of story about the abductor she claimed to have seen, making one doubt that she actually saw anyone
(iii) An unconvincing account of Madeleine being at the beach for a min-sail with the Lobster group on Thursday 3 May
(iv) A photo of Madeleine holding some tennis balls, known as the ‘Tennis Balls Photo’, claimed to have been taken by three different people on three different dates, making its authenticity extremely doubtful)
(v) The multiple contradictions surrounding an alleged 'high tea' said to have taken place between 5pm & 6pm on Thursday)

B. The photograph of Madeleine McCann, Dr Gerry McCann and Amelie, taken by the Ocean Club pool, which was clearly taken on Sunday 29 April 2007 and not on 3 May 2007 as claimed by the McCanns.

C. The absence of photographs of Madeleine taken after Sunday.

D. The fabricated statement of Nuno Lourenco, who had framed Wojcek Krokowski as Madeleine’s abductor

E. The unreliable evidence of the children’s nanny (and McCann family friend), Catriona Baker, Dr Gerry McCann and Dr Kate McCann about an alleged ‘high tea’ at the Ocean Club Tapas restaurant about 5pm to 6pm on Thursday 3 May

F. The lack of any independent or credible independent evidence by anybody that Madeleine McCann was seen alive after Sunday 29 April.

G. The mystery of the strange ‘Make-Up Photo’ of Madeleine, which appears to have been taken on Sunday 29th April

H. Clear photographic evidence that the same pyjamas Madeleine had with her on holiday in Praia da Luz were later held up by the McCanns at two press conferences, one in London on 5 June 2007, the other in Amsterdam on 7 June 2007.

In each case, particulars of each of these lines of evidence were given to the Attorney General.


Since then, additional evidence that Madeleine may have died as early as Sunday has been obtained, as follows:

1. According to evidence from the internet site, the Wayback Machine, during Monday 30 April 2007, an employee of CEOP (The Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre), presumably with the full approval of its boss, Jim Gamble, uploaded a dummy (blank) page to the CEOP website, featuring a photo of Madeleine when she was about two years old. What prior knowledge did CEOP have about Madeleine's disappearance, and how and when did they obtain a photo of Madeleine, apparently taken a year or two before the McCanns' Praia da Luz holiday?

2. Evidence (on his own admission) by Jon Clarke, owner of the expat newspaper The Olive Press, that he arrived in Praia da Luz at 1.30am on Friday 4 May, strongly suggesting that he had been tipped off by one or more newspapers – before the abduction alarm was raised – that there was going to be a story about her abduction.

3. Evidence recently obtained about Michael Frohlich and Tricia Moon, the two members of Resonate Communications who we know were in Praia da Luz well before Thursday 3 May. While we were told that Resonate was merely an independent ‘subsidiary’ of PR giant Bell Pottinger, we now know that Tricia Moon had been the Company Secretary of Bell Pottinger and that while she was in Praia da Luz that week, and for four months afterwards, she was actually a Director on the Board of Bell Pottinger.
For more information on this, see this recent thread:
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t17244-a-director-on-the-board-of-disgraced-pr-company-bell-pottinger-was-in-praia-da-luz-before-madeleine-was-reported-missing

A. TIMETABLE OF RELEVANT EVENTS

We have accounts of that week’s events (from the McCanns’arrival in Praia da Luz on Saturday 28 April onwards), from the McCanns and their ’Tapas 7’ friends. These tend on the whole to be in very general terms, vague and with few checkable details. They are not helpful in establishing what events took place that week that went towards creating an audacious abduction hoax that Thursday. The aim of this thread is to explore what actions were taken, and by whom, to create the abduction hoax.

Below we have set out a timetable of some known, checkable events (with approximate dates and times) that may have a bearing on how the abduction hoax was developed and planned that week.

Below that we add a large list of events that we say must have happened that week, most of which have been largely hidden from public view. We take some educated guesses as to when these events might have taken place.

CHECKABLE EVENTS THAT WEEK (FOR WHICH WE HAVE INDEPENDENT EVIDENCE]

Sunday 29 April

about 10am - Madeleine enrolled in Lobster club

about 10-11.30am - Lobster group with multicoloured parachute

about 1.15/1.30pm - Madeleine and family seen by cleaner, going up to join the Payne family for lunch

probably 2.29pm - Madeleine photographed by the pool - but McCanns said the photo was taken on Thursday

8.18pm SUNSET

around 8pm-10pm A tall man, accompanied by a young child, apparently late in the evening, makes an urgent request to Ocean Club reception on behalf of the McCann group to book the Tapas restaurant for the rest of the week. The receptionist says the girl is Madeleine McCann, but that is very doubtful. This version of events is later contradicted by Kate McCann herself AND Matt Oldfield, who says Rachel made the booking on Monday. that there were in fact two visits to make the booking, the ‘tall man’ on Sunday night, and Rachel on Monday morning]

evening meal - McCanns say Matt was not at the meal (stomach ache). Stephen Carpenter says he saw Gerry McCann at the Tapas restaurant that evening

Monday 30 April

morning - Apartment cleaned by middle-aged lady

sometime - Gerry had trouble with the shutters (said to be in the parents' room) and reported them for repair. Matthew also had trouble with his shutters? [It is not wholly clear if these shutters were in the children's room or the parent's (back) room where the children were originally supposed to be sleeping?]

The McCanns and the Tapas 7 give very little detail about what happened this day, they all seem to stutter and are unable to remember anything.

8.19pm SUNSET

11pm? - Robert Murat books a ticket to fly to Faro Airport

Tuesday 1 May

7am - Robert Murat leaves Exeter Airport

9.30am - Robert Murat arrives at Faro Airport. Is met by his mother

10.00-11.00am Washing machine and blinds/shutters fixed by two men, between 10-11am. Kate was there, not Gerry. The men show McCann how to use washing machine (these actions COULD suggest preparation for (a) having to wash clothes in the week and (b) a hoax abduction later in the week, involving the shutters)

lunch-time - It was raining. Gerry allegedly bought sunglasses this day according to Kate McCann's book, 'madeleine': “All 5 of us were at the beach”. Was this because the ‘Last Photo’ had been taken on the Sunday, so, by saying in the book that he didn't have sunglasses and needed to buy a pair, was this intended to lend credibility to it having been taken after Tuesday )

8.20pm SUNSET

evening meal - Russell not at dinner, not sure about Jane Tanner as well?

10.16-10.27pm - unusual flurry of six calls to Kate McCanns’ mobile. We can’t be certain where she was at the time

Wednesday 2 May

7.00am-9.00am - Very early, around 7am, Kate has 3 calls (deleted) to her friend in England, Amanda (who is married to a pathologist). Shortly after, at around 8am, Gerry starts receiving the first of 14 text messages. ['The calls that day also include the ‘strange’ Swansea number…the only
number that Kate never deleted.

morning - Apartment cleaned by middle-aged lady - Maria Julia. At some point during Wednesday morning the cleaner is let into Apartment 5A and the McCanns say “we are going on the balcony” but actually they leave the apartment via the balcony door. The cleaner makes the beds and notices a cot in the McCann’s bedroom. Gerry and Kate both later deny that the cot is there]

Kate McCann “Today it rained” (confirmed by weather charts)

8.21pm SUNSET

‘Rachel’s turn to feel under the weather’

very late evening - the group stays at the Tapas until late that night. The waiters want to leave at midnight but the group stays until approx 1am. Is there perhaps something very important to discuss/plan?

Thursday 3 May

morning - Kate washes Madeleine’s pyjamas because of a tea stain (confirmed in her book). Photographs of these pyjamas later appear in newspapers with a false claim that they are ‘stock’ photos from a sales brochure - see many analyses of this by by Dr Martin Roberts, e.g. 'A Nightwear Job'.

5pm -6pm Tapas 7 seen at Paraiso Bar, but not the McCanns

8.30pm-8.55pm Gerry, Kate & Jane to Tapas, followed by Matthew & Rachael, then David, Fiona & Dianne to Tapas. Russell O’Brien delayed.

Continued..

OTHER RELEVANT EVENTS THAT WEEK WITH APPROXIMATE OR UNKOWN TIMING

Sunday 29 April

afternoon/evening - Make-Up Photo taken?

Monday 30 April

time unknown - claim by Jane Tanner that she met the Gorrods that day. They had rented a car

Tuesday 1 May

Robert lies to police about what he did that day but when requestrioned on 10-11 July 2007 admits that he "tried to contact Jorge da Silva that day"

Wednesday 2 May

morning - Robert Murat (in his 2nd story, he admits his 1st story was lies) says:
“Sorry, that’s not true. I didn’t leave home by 10.30am. In truth I met with Sergei Malinka that morning at the Batista supermarket, at around 10.00am".
"I forgot to tell you that actually Malinka was also involved in the Romigen project, as he had been designing the website for the proposed company. Malinka and me left the Batista supermarket together. After that, I went to Michaela’s and brought her to my mother’s home. And later I took her back to Lagos…"
"Sorry, I got that bit wrong as well. Actually, I now remember that I’d gone to my bank, the Credit Agricultural Bank that morning, and paid in, in sterling cash, the sum of 287.51 euros. The bank was just 200 yards or so from the house of my lawyer, Francisco Pagarete. It was after going to the bank that I’d gone to Pagarete's house. This sum came from a Lloyds Bank account in my or my mother’s name, as I wanted to transfer it
into his Portuguese bank account".
"Also I now remember that I paid an unannounced visit to Francisco Pagarate’s home [a lawyer] at about 11.00am to 11.30am. I now remember that I called Pagarete on my mobile ’phone and arranged to meet him later that day”.

afternoon - Robert Murat (in his 2nd story) says
“Sorry, once again I’ve got that bit wrong as well. In fact I did after all manage to meet my lawyer Francisco Pagarete that afternoon"
"I also forgot that two of Jorge da Silva’s sons were present at that meeting, not just one"
Furthermore, I was wrong to have said that I went back with Michaela and her daughter to Lagos that day. I didn’t. Instead, I met once again with Jorge and his sons at the café in the Marina area, to carry on talking about their proposed business plans. We left the café when the owner said he was about to close it…"
"OK, I’ve got a lot of that wrong as well. In actual fact, what happened was this. I actually gave Jorge and one of his sons a lift in my mother’s VW Transporter to the ’bus stop, then I drove on to Lagos with Michaela and her daughter. We didn’t arrive back until 8.00pm. Then, Michaela began straightaway, to cook the dinner".
"I’m not sure now if Luis Antonia [husband of Michael Walczuk)] returned to the house that evening. I left Lagos between 10.30pm and 11.00pm and arrived back home between 10.45pm and 11.15pm. I drove by my usual route and I don’t recollect stopping anywhere".
[The police now pressed him once more by asking if he had stopped anywhere on the way back] "No, I can state with absolute certainty that I did not make any stops or calls on the way back home".
[The police now asked him if he’d made a telephone call to his lawyer, Pagarete, at 3.42pm that afternoon]. "Oh yes. I remember now, I did. And I confirm I was up until around 1.30am that morning - my mother would often be up until that time, doing things like ‘feeding the cats and other business’ before retiring to bed".
"Oh, and another thing I’ve remembered. During the afternoon of 2 or 3, May, sorry can’t remember which, I visited two apartments, both
belonging to the same owner, near the ‘Rotunda of the Ball’, in Lagos, with Michaela. It was about issues related to business’. The visits took
about 20-30 minutes”.

Thursday 3 May

times uncertain - Robert Murat in his (2nd story) Robert Murat says he & Michaela are at a morning meeting in the morning:
“I’m sorry, I got all that wrong as well. Let me tell you what really happened. I actually woke at 8.00am and left the house by 8.45am. I had to keep a scheduled appointment at a business tourist complex called ‘Gold Bunker’ in the Espiche district near Almádena. Michaela was with me. I’m really sorry I didn’t mention this before".
[The police asked how come Michaela happened to be with him as early as 8.45am]. "Er, I now remember that she had come over to Praia da Luz. We both drove in my mother’s VW Transporter to the meeting, arriving there at 9.30am. We had the meeting in Espiche" [NOTE: In her statement, Michaela Walczuk had claimed that this meeting had taken place in her own apartment].

afternoon - Robert Murat (in his 2nd story) Robert Murat said that he & Michaela visited two apartments in the afternoon and then go to the Palmares Golf Club. He now says:
"Look, I’m really sorry, I got that bit wrong as well. This is what really happened. I know I couldn’t remember this meeting when I spoke to
you on 14 May, but me and Michaela met the female owner’s father-in-law [unnamed in the Portuguese Police files]. Sorry, I really can’t
recall his name now, but he was a builder from Lagos. Then the owner of the ‘Gold Bunker’ complex [also unnamed in the PJ files] arrived to join the meeting a little later. We all then continued talking and all had lunch together. After that, me and Michaela went to the Marina in Lagos where we met with Jorge and his son again. By the way, I’ve remembered now that actually Michaela’s daughter, C____, did not accompany us that day - sorry for getting that wrong last time. I also need to tell you - another thing that I forgot - that we went to the Palmeras Golf Club that afternoon. We stayed there until the time to pick up C____, i.e. around 3.30pm. Jorge and his son Jason were again in the car. I dropped them off near the Post Office on the way to pick up C____. The three of us then drove to Michaela’s house for 3.45pm and stayed there until around 7.30pm. I then drove straight home and didn’t stop anywhere en route...I may have made myself a cup of tea and then switched on the TV and maybe read a newspaper. I remember thereafter talking to my mother in the kitchen until about 10.00pm to 10.30pm about my ‘Romigen’ business project and I had a ham-and-cheese sandwich".
"Contrary to what I said earlier, I didn’t speak to Michaela on the telephone, because between 8.00pm and 10.00pm, she said she had
been at a Thursday night Jehovah’s Witness meeting, and she’d switched off her mobile ’phone. I might have spoken to her after
10.00pm, but I can’t remember".
"Sorry, actually I do admit I made two telephone calls late that night, one to Sergei Malinka at 11.39pm and another at 11.40pm to Michaela. I don’t remember making these calls, and I haven’t a clue what they were about, but I admit I must have made them. [NOTE: The Daily Mail was still, bizarrely, carrying on its website, in 2010, a public apology to Sergei Malinka for ever having suggested that the two men spoke with each other that night(!)].

around 8pm/8.30pm, or maybe even earlier, Jon Clarke, editor of the Olive Press, may have received a telephone call a British newspaper asking him to go to Praia da Luz to report on a missing child. We deduce this because he had bragged to a reporter about having been in Praia da Luz by 1.30am on Friday 4 May, and the time needed to travel from his home near Ronda to Praia da Luz would have been at least 5 hours [he has on numerous occasions been evasive about the time of the 'phone call or given different times for it]  QUOTE FROM JON CLARKE: "But when an opportunity arose to cover a meaty case for a number of the tabloids, it was too good a chance to miss", Clarke, Jon. "MY SEARCH FOR MADELEINE: One Reporter’s 14-Year Hunt To Solve Europe’s Most Harrowing Crime" (p. 37). OP Books. Kindle Edition.

OTHER RELEVANT EVENTS THAT WEEK WHICH MUST HAVE HAPPENED, BUT WITH NO KNOWN TIMINGS

A. The movements of Nuno Lourenco.  He was clearly engaged to fit up Wojcek Krokowski as a decoy suspect. He invented a false story about him being at Sagres on Sunday 29 April, then took a photo of his car, and finally ‘phoned up the Portuguese police on the morning of Saturday 5 May, making false claims about him, causing major disruption to the police on Day 2 of the search for Madeleine.

How did this happen? We suggest:
1. Someone had to devise a plan not only to get one of the Tapas 7 (Jane Tanner) to invent an abductor, but to get another individual to do so, the following day. Questions:
(a) Who was the person to devise this cunning plan?
(b) Who actually found Nuno Lourenco him and spoke to him?
(c) Who gave him the detailed instructions?
(d) Did Wojcek Krokowski actually know about this plan? Or was he a willing or unwilling accomplice?
(e) How did Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco know how to give a near-identical description to the police? Did one or both of them actually meet Krokowski?
(f) When did Nourenco take the photograph of the car? He said the date and time stamp showed it was taken on Sunday. But did someone alter the date and time, just as appeared to have happened with the ‘Last Photo’? Did he take it much later in the week?
(g) Krokowski was staying in flats owned and run by a property company begun by Robert Murat’s father. Krowkowski appears to have eaten many meals that week at the Burgau beach bar, owned apparently by Ralph Eveleigh, Robert Murat’s uncle. What was the connection between Wojcek Krokowski and the Murat/Eveleigh families?
(h) The Portuguese Police found hairs of the same haplotype as Robert Murat and Jane Tanner at Krokowski’s holiday apartment. What could explain that. Here is one possible scenario. Was Murat co-ordinating events that week? Did he already know Krokowski? - after all, he was staying at a Murat family-run set of apartments? Did Murat bring Jane Tanner to Krokowski’s apartment so that she could meet Krokowski? - enabling her to give police that fake description of an abductor on the morning of 4 May?
(I) Did Krokowski actually have an interest in photographing children, as Lourenco claimed? Did he, or Murat, or both, know about Krokowski’s propensity for taking photographs of young children? After all, he as much as admitted his love of photographing children when he was interviewed for the Sunday People in 200 .

B. The movements of Robert Murat.  Robert Murat created many suspicions about what really happened to Madeleine. He suddenly left England early on Tuesday 1 May. He then lied about his movements on Tuesday, We4dnesday and Thursday of that week. He then behaved so suspiciously in his role as a translator, for example, looking at police files when he wasn’t supposed to, and suggesting lines of enquiry to the police, that he was sacked after 7 days. These raised the possibility that he had been asked to help in the concealment of Madeleine’s body

C. The actions of Jim Gamble, boss of CEOP.  On Monday 30 April, according to evidence from the internet site, the Wayback Machine, Jim Gamble, then boss of CEOP, uploaded a dummy (blank) page to the CEOP website, featuring a photo of Madeleine when she was about two years old.

D. The conduct of Catriona Baker.  If Madeleine died on Sunday, then Cat Baker was clearly complicit in the cover-up. She would been told, for example, to allow the creche records to be falsified so as to ‘prove’ that Madeleine was alive. Who briefed her, and when?

E. The Make-Up Photo.  There are several indications that this photograph may have been taken on Sunday afternoon, 29 April 2007, hours after the ‘Last Photo’, which we now know was also taken Sunday, not Thursday. We have these indications:
(I) Maddie’s face looks the same age as in other photos on that holiday (nearly 4)
(ii) Her hair length looks exactly the same as on the Last Photo
(iii) The background of a yellow/ochre stucco wall is consistent with buildings in Portugal but not with buildings in England
(iv) The claim that she was ‘only playing with Mummy’s make-up box’ looks patently false
(v) She is wearing a necklace which she almost certainly would not have been able to put on unaided
(vi) She is wearing a hair bead on both photos
(vii) Her eyes are surrounded with blue eyeshadow
(viii) The photo gives indications that she may have been painted with some lipstick and eye-liner.

There are various indicators that the McCanns themselves did not take this photo. We know John Corner must have had it in order to include the video from where this still image is derived. So, who took the photo? Who gave it to Jon Corner (if Corner himself didn’t take it?) And above all else, why is Madeleine looking so very unhappy? Was this the only one taken of her in make-up? Where are the happy ones? Why did Corner release it?

F. The briefing of Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco. On Friday 4 May, when interviewed by police, Jane Tanner described a man she said she had seen the previous evening carrying a bundle or a child. Early on Saturday, Lourenco told a manifestly untrue story about Krokowski trying to kidnap his child at Sagres the previous Sunday (29 April). Did he already know Krokowski? If not, did someone tell him about Krokowski? Who? Who decided to run the hoax that Krokowksi was the abductor? When was Jane Tanner briefed? When was Lourenco briefed? Was Robert Murat involved in developing this story (hairs of the same haplotype of both Robert Murat and Jane Tanner were found at his holiday flat). Who is the mysterious ‘burger bar owner’ who is curiously not named in the PJ files but who gave the details about Krokowski discussing football and buying a record or disk of Brazilian music?

G. The planning of the abduction hoax.   This required planning, and a ‘mastermind’ or group of masterminds. For example:
(i) Who decided that an invented abduction would be the way to explain Madeleine’s sudden disappearance?
(ii)Who decided the abduction should be ‘called’ for 10pm Thursday (curiously the very moment voting in the nationwide local elections closed).
(iii) Who decided on lining up David Payne to make up a story about meeting Kat McCann at 6.30pm Thursday?
(iv) Who decided on running the fake ‘high tea’ story at 5pm/6pm on Thursday, which even deceived Goncalo Amaral and his team?

H. The precise date when Michael Frohlich and Tricia Moon arrived in Praia da Luz that week Before Monday? Or on or after Monday?


AND...  There are many other indications that Madeleine was not alive after Sunday which have been discussed on CMOMM and elsewhere, notably the films of Richard D Hall. This would necessitate any actors being involved, probably many at or near the top levels of the British government, considering the number of PR advisers, police and security officers, lawyers, ambassadorial staff, top media personnel  and others who rapidly descended on Praia da Luz in the days immediately following Thursday 3 May.  


We will add a poll to aid discussion:

Poll Question:

Which of these is the single most important reason that you believe that Madeleine died before Thursday?

Possible answers:

1 Doubt over whether McCanns could plan and execute a successful abduction hoax in just 4 hours (6pm-10pm Thursday)
2 I think David Payne and Kate McCann invented their fake meeting early Thursday evening
3 The absence of any photos of Madeleine definitely taken on or after Monday
4 The evidence of the cadaver dogs
5 The facts that so many lies were told by so many
6 The CEOP website having a dummy Madeleine page on Monday 30 April
7 Jane Tanner, Nuno Lourenco and Martin Smiths all coming up with basically the same description of an imagined abductor
8 The ‘Last Photo’ being taken on Sunday not Thursday
9 The absence of any independent, credible or reliable witness evidence that Madeleine was alive after Sunday
10 Actually, I think she was either abducted, or died, on Thursday 3 May

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t17250-if-madeleine-mccann-died-on-sunday-29-april-what-was-really-going-on-behind-the-scenes-that-week#448992

Yes, I've noticed lots of new members have joined over the past few months but are not posting, just lurking

If I may add, no member or reader long term medium term or short term is asked, nor expected, to agree with every major or minor detail contained here on CMOMM/MMRG.

It's a personal voyage of discovery.

It's opposing opinions that make the world go round, without healthy debate the world would stagnate and no mystery ever solved. Continued debate is the only way to move forward with our ultimate goal in focus .... justice in the name of Madeleine McCann.

This thread is also a free for all so you won't be off topic, providing you go with the flow and stick to the case of Madeleine McCann.  I'm using this thread to highlight past research and theory for that very reason + some previous writings are for information only so it's not possible to post a reply.

Onwards and upwards   !

Madeleine McCann: The Last Photo = The Pool Photo



1 The McCanns had a Canon PowerShot A620.
In her book Kate only refers to a camera in the singular. My camera, our camera. She clearly states that ‘our camera’ was taken away by RO’B so that photos could be printed in the form of a poster. Later that night, when everyone had been asked to leave the apartment, the official scenes of crime photos were taken by the PJ. On the dining table the Canon PowerShot can clearly be seen. The photo session and forensic examination by the PJ took place between 0030 and 0400, 4/5/2007.
The EXIF metadata for the “Last Photo” clearly shows that it was taken on the Canon.

2 The Canon was retained by the McCanns, and neither it, nor the memory stick were apparently surrendered for examination. This camera was in Kate’s possession early on 10th May. It is not known whether the PJ were fully aware of its existence.

3 On 20th May Gerry McCann flew to England, and returned home.

4 He returned to Portugal on 22nd May, with Clarence Mitchell.

5 Gerry McCann’s sister, Philomena, also flew out to Portugal on 22nd May.

6 The “Last Photo” was released through the AFP agency on 24th May.

9 The “Last Photo” was taken with the Canon PowerShot A620 camera.

10 It is relatively simple to alter some of the EXIF metadata, including the date and time, using software freely available on the internet.

11 The EXIF metadata have clearly been accessed and amended by the AFP agency to include the description of the photo.

12 Gerry’s brother in law - Philomena’s husband - Tony Rickwood, is a photographer who is highly skilled at altering images. It is inconceivable that he does not also know how to alter the date and time in the EXIF and to erase aspects of it.

13 Tony Rickwood owns several cameras, including a Canon PowerShot A480 - a model previous to the A620.

14 The McCanns lay heavy emphasis on the importance on the “Last Photo”.




15 Through their spokesman Mitchell, they go to great lengths to explain that the EXIF time might be incorrect by exactly an hour. They make no such claims for any other photo. No other photos from the Canon have been put in the public domain. In each story the words “her own camera” are used.

16 The “Last Photo” is tendered as independent evidence that Madeleine was alive and well during the early afternoon of 3rd May

17 The time given in the EXIF data for the photo is exactly Solar zenith (noon) at Faro, Portugal on 3/5/2007

19 Rickwood is a keen astronomer, and is a member of the British Astronomical Society.

20 There is a strong suspicion that the time and date on the “Last Photo” are, at the very least, unreliable. It is not thought that the image itself has been altered.

21 Almost all other such evidence is specifically stated to be uncorroborated by others in the group, and detailed explanations are given as to why this is so. This leaves the “Last Photo” as the only independent evidence of Madeleine’s being alive and well on 3rd May.

22 The visit by David Payne, and the check by Oldfield do not alter this position. There is considerable doubt as to the veracity of the crèche sheets, which contradict directly Kate’s alternative version in the book.

23 Rachel Oldfield’s statement that she saw Madeleine on the tennis court on 3rd is directly contradicted, in detail and with some force, by O’Brien. In her Rogatory Tanner speaks of Gerry having a lesson and has thus clearly confused this with the Wednesday. O’Brien contradicts this and corrects this with some force and determination, making it clear that Madeleine was NOT there on Thursday 3rd May.

Rachel Oldfield confuses the two days, putting the taking of the “tennis balls” photo on Thursday 3rd.

Kate, and O’Brien are absolutely clear that this was not 3rd.
Kate insists that she herself took the tennis balls photo on Tuesday 1st
Russell O’Brien insists it was taken on Wednesday 2nd
Rachel Oldfield states that it was taken by Jane Tanner on the Thursday 3rd.

When the witnesses talk about Madeleine’s NOT having been present, the style of the language used is very different from the rest of the Rogatory interviews. The witnesses become fluent and coherent, and we see very little of the hesitation, the linguistic fillers of “err”, ummm”; repetitions of part sentences and so on, which characterise the rest of those interviews when other aspects of their recollections are being discussed.

Read more here: http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/chapter-14-last-photo-pool-photo.html

Chapter copied from retired Police Superintendent PeterMac's FREE e-book 'What really happened to Madeleine McCann?', which has now been updated: http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/

It would be nice to know what new members of the forum think of the Complete Mystery of Madelene McCann; we have Gerry McCann's permission to 'purport theories', so please let's know how you feel.

I've slightly modified the title of this thread and intend to move the more recent posts on 'Leave No Stone Unturned' here as it seems more appropriate on the dawn of the 16th anniversary of the Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann - an extension of past contribution.

Rules remain the same.

ETA: Posts merged

Verdi wrote:....on the dawn of the 16th anniversary of the Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann...

Geezus, have we really all been here that long?

No sooner had I updated this than it needed to be updated again.

Get it framed and hang it just inside the revolving door !

A BRIEF HISTORY OF CMOMM AND THE MMRG

From its beginning on 25 November 2009, with only eight members, to this very day where CMOMM has nearly 10,000 members, the forum has gone from strength to strength, as years come and go, a great many people have joined and made valuable contributions to the debate. Every month the forum attracts a steady flow of new members, thanks to it's professional presentation and extensive content packed with fact, evidence, reference material, research, analysis, points of discussion and more.

Early on, it became clear that CMOMM was not merely just another Madeleine discussion forum or blog. It rapidly attracted serious researchers. Unsurprisingly, within just 18 months, it replaced another Madeleine forum, The 3 Arguidos, as the most popular in terms of membership and number of views per day. Since then it has maintained and extended its dominance of the internet world of Madeleine McCann discussions.

A COVER-UP

But not only that, it very soon morphed from a discussion forum into an investigative forum - one where serious, collaborative research was done into the many things which have been hidden by what CMOMM members and guests firmly believe is an almighty cover-up of what really happened to Madeleine McCann.

But not only did it become an investigative forum, it also became a campaigning forum. Elsewhere on the forum you will find a long list of campaign activity - petitions, leafleting, letters to top politicians right up to the Prime Minister, letters to the police in England and in Portugal, and much else besides.

Many of those who have contributed to CMOMM have, in common with the usual practice elsewhere on the internet, decided to remain anonymous for personal reasons. More importantly, there is a particular reason for this here on CMOMM, namely that the McCanns are extremely litigious and will stop at nothing to silence their critics. The anonymity has no impact on member contribution, all are equally valued by CMOMM.


LIBEL ACTIONS

As is well-known, in June 2009 the McCanns sued the original investigation co-ordinator, Gonçalo Amaral, for libel damages, claiming hundreds of thousands of pounds. Their claim failed after a bewildering succession of court actions, lasting eight years, in which their case went all the way up to the Supreme Court, back down to the lowest court, then up again to the Supreme Court a second time. But though the McCanns lost, the succession of court actions placed a severe strain on Gonçalo Amaral, who had to incur huge costs defending himself.

The McCanns also targeted CMOMM member Tony Bennett, a founder member of CMOMM. Sse our article “How it all began” here:

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/f80-how-it-all-began

Despite undertakings he was forced to give to the McCanns at a High Court hearing on 25 November 2009, Tony continued to write and campaign about the case. On 1 December 2011 the McCanns lost patience with him and brought a case in the High Court alleging that he had broken the terms of his undertakings. Tony defended the case, but lost. On 25 February 2013, Mr Justice Tugendhat held that Tony had breached a number of his undertakings and sentenced him to three months in prison, suspended for one year. As a result, CMOMM was required to remove some of Tony’s articles from the forum. Tony still contributes to the forum, but is limited as to what he can say.

CMOMM continues to be carefully watched by the McCann legal force which enforces certain restrictions on what's written. This minor irritation doesn't prevent the forum from pursuing it's objective, it just makes us more diligent about commentary. So, in a manner of speaking, it's to our advantage that we strive to only present fact, evidence and informed commentary.

KEY CONTRIBUTORS

Hundreds of members, past and present, have made significant contributions to the research and analysis carried out on the forum. It would be great to pay personal tribute to all of them by name, but, as explained above, the vast majority prefer to retain their anonymity.

Over the years, three CMOMM members who have been prepared to be named, and have made giant contributions to the research work here, are Peter MacLeod, Lizzy Taylor and Richard D. Hall.

Peter MacLeod is a retired Police Superintendent from Nottinghamshire Police, now living in Spain. He joined CMOMM early on, where he is better known as ‘PeterMac’. His greatest contribution to understanding what really happened to Madeleine McCann is his outstanding e-book, chronicling key evidential issues in the case. CMOMM is proud to host all chapters of his e-book at this link: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t16005-petermac-s-free-e-book-what-really-happened-to-madeleine-mccann

The e-book is also available FREE on the internet, here:

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.com

Frankly, everyone who really wants to understand the Madeleine McCann case should make sure s/he reads every chapter.

Perhaps the single most important piece of work that Peter thoroughly investigated was the McCanns’ claim that the so-called ‘Last Photo’ of Madeleine, by the Ocean Club swimming pool, was taken at 2.29pm on the last day of their holiday, Thursday 3 May 2007. In more detail, he has shown that the only day of the week that this photo could possibly have been taken was Sunday, 29th April, the only warm and sunny day that week.

Lizzy 'HiDeHo' Taylor is a British-born businesswoman now living in Canada. Right from the start, she was convinced that the McCanns’ account of events on their holiday in Praia da Luz was not true, and began to make a major contribution to public understanding of the case in a prolific series of YouTube vidoes. She also joined CMOMM in the early days and her research is well worth studying in depth.

Perhaps the single most important piece of work that Lizzy thoroughly researched was her patient, detailed analysis of all the statements made by witnesses who claimed that Madeleine was alive after Sunday 29 April, which she published here on CMOMM. She recognised that some key witnesses were clearly not independent, such as the McCanns and their close-knit group of friends, who have been called the Tapas 7. She paid special attention to a claim by the McCanns & Madeleine’s crèche supervisor, Catriona Baker, that they were with Madeleine at a ‘high tea’ between about 5pm and 6pm on Thursday 3 May, the night Madeleine was reported missing. This alleged event was important because the Portuguese Police believed that Catriona Baker was being truthful. Lizzy’s exhaustive analysis of the multiple contradictions between the McCanns and Catriona Baker’s account of events cast severe doubt on the claim that Madeleine was still alive at 6pm that evening, and led to CMOMM members questioning when she was last seen by anyone independent that week. Her analysis can be viewed on the forum and we have links to many of her best videos.

Richard D Hall has made five documentary films about Madeleine McCann, which have been viewed tens of millions of times on YouTube. He joined CMOMM in 2014, the year when his first Madeleine documentary, ‘The True Story of Madeleine McCann’, was suddenly released and was immediately watched by millions. There was an amazing response to his 4-hour presentation of mountains of disturbing facts hitherto withheld by the mainstream media. Literally dozens of people have uploaded his Madeleine documentaries onto their own YouTube channels. At the end of his first film he publicly acknowledged the help of articles on CMOMM in the preparation of his film. Richard’s investigative skills have been revealed in a series of true crime investigations, including ‘The Didcot Murders’, ‘Kill Jill’ (on the killing of Jill Dando) and ‘Exit from Brexit’ (on the murder of Jo Cox).

OUR OTHER MEMBERS

Who are our other members?

Broadly speaking they are a group of good hearted people from all walks of life, who have joined together with a common goal, to see justice for little Madeleine McCann, a lost soul who has been so severely let down by those who should really care. Her family and the British establishment.

Many members have specialist knowledge or expertise. We would love to give you some of their names but we have to respect our members right to anonymity.

Among our other resident experts are academics, health and social service professionals, those with legal knowledge and police experience , experts in photography - including digital photography - forensics experts including those familiar with DNA analysis, and people from many walks of life whose experience and views help to make up the rich tapestry of this forum.

Sharon 'sharonl' Lawrence is an accountant who amongst other work has carried out analyses of the controversial and very sparse accounts the McCanns have to provide to Companies House for their company ‘Find Madeleine’ – often falsely described as a charity.

Tania 'Hobs' Cadogan is a statement analyst, an expert at analysing written statements, who has worked in conjunction with Peter Hyatt, the well-known U.S. statement analyst, who was interviewed at length by Richard Hall for his fourth Madeleine documentary film, ‘Embedded Confessions’.

THE MADELEINE MCCANN RESEARCH GROUP

On the forum, you’ll find many analytical articles by members of the ‘Madeleine McCann Research Group’ (MMRG). Some of these were former members of the Madeleine Foundation (see our article ‘How it all Began’). Other members here contribute to their work. MMRG also makes use of other excellent research published by those who are not CMOMM members, notably the work of Dr Martin Roberts, most of which is also are published on CMOMM, see this link:

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/f48-dr-martin-roberts-mccannfiles

We decided to open up this special section of the forum to promote MMRG’s work. The group intend to republish some of the excellent Madeleine Foundation articles (albeit edited to avoid any libel) which were previously removed from the forum in 2012 because of fears of possible libel action by the McCanns. We’ll put the articles here as we get them.

WHAT IS THE COLLECTIVE VIEW OF THE FORUM ADMIN AND CMOMM’S LEADING RESEARCHERS ON WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO MADELEINE MCCANN?

Right from the start, nearly all members here accept that there is more than enough circumstantial and forensic evidence to believe that Madeleine died in the McCanns’ holiday apartment some time that week.

Three issues have made us all look deeper at when on that holiday Madeleine may have died.

The first was the extraordinary BBC Crimewatch McCann Special shown on 14 October 2013. This hour-long ‘Special’, watched by 7 million viewers, i.e. about one in six of all British adults, put an alleged sighting of a man - carrying a young blond child towards the beach at the very time the McCanns were raising the alarm - as the ‘center of the focus’ of the work being done by the Metropolitan Police into Madeleine’s disappearance. The sighting has divided opinion on the forum ,as cam be seen by searching the word ‘Smithman’ on the forum.

The second was the issue of when the so-called ‘Last Photograph’ of Madeleine McCann was taken.

The McCanns said that this photo of her by the swimming pool was taken at 2.29pm on the last day of her holiday, i.e. Thursday. But expert evidence collated by PeterMac and analysed on the forum left little room for doubt that it must have been taken on the only sunny day that week - Sunday. And there are no other photos of Madeleine that week that we can be certain were taken after Sunday.

We have already mentioned the third issue, namely the work pioneered by Lizzy Taylor in which she cast doubt on whether there was any credible, independent witness evidence of Madeleine being seen alive after Sunday.

For all these reasons, it is the collective view of the CMOMM Admin team that Madeleine must have experienced a sudden and serious event, probably on Sunday or Monday, which led to her death.

None of us know how she might have died. That is a subject which his discussed from time to time on the forum.

FORUM DEBATE

CMOMM is an open forum that anyone can join. It is primarily an investigative forum. Robust, though polite, disagreement and debate is fine, and welcomed, but be prepared to have your theories challenged if they lack support. Whether you have relevant experience and qualifications or not, do join in where you can, and help us edge ever nearer the truth about what really happened to Madeleine.

The CMOMM Admin Team, April 2019