Madeleine's parents seek support from London and Lisbon to review the case

"The book will be coming out around the fourth anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance – God forbid we get that far."

You will TM and well you know it. You wouldn't be writing this book if you thought Madeleine would be found. God forbid that the lot of you are not behind bars by the time the 4th anniversary of your daughter's disappearance comes around.

Annabel have merged your post in with this topic as it is already posted here and being discussed

A little quote from the master of publicity and media representation. The very pretty and not at all nylon rug attired Clarence Michelle.

"All you hear about is the critics, so it is very satisfying to see all the people out there showing support"

Mr Michelle said the petition will continue to run until the signatures stop coming in.....so he has failed utterly if "All you hear is the critics". But the silent masses..22,000 in the first day, and now 36,000 are there ready to rally to the cause. With the signatures probably set to pour in for ever and ever, it will never get sent to Portugal and thus the request for a review will never actually be recieved, thus thus there may never actually be a review. Is there a flaw in that plan Clarence?

All they can do to fight the good cause is attack and abuse those who ask questions, now they seek to attack the remarkable soursce of information the McCannfiles. Perhaps there is just too much information on the site. Perhaps they want people to realise that the lovely Ms Tanner was miss quoted, and selected parts of her rogatory interview have been used and abused.

I must confess i did not realise she spoke fluent Portuguese and her statements were given in that language and then translated a few times back into English in various forms for some odd reason. I have got that right haven't i? Must go, got to go sign a petition a few hundred times x

Clarence Darling x wrote:A little quote from the master of publicity and media representation. The very pretty and not at all nylon rug attired Clarence Michelle.

"All you hear about is the critics, so it is very satisfying to see all the people out there showing support.

That statement shows they're aware of critics and very bugged by it.

If you're thinking of the same petition I might pop in to sign it next month. I bet it will still be there at least until after the book launch. There is no deadline nor target number so no need to hurry to do it. If fact they would much prefer it if people do their hundreds of signature in batches every fortnight to keep it going for eternity. That way they can wheel out their pinky and say public support is ongoing to lure people into parting with cash to buy their product. The i-petition is a begging bowl in disguise to pretend they are serious about their search to target vulnerable and guillable people 's money.
They are after delayed-action support and would be very satisfied if people comply accordingly because it suits their purpose.
I think they are collecting statistics more than anything else. They are no way going to present that to any authority because they know v. well no police is looking for Maddie.

Oh i am sure public support is ongoing, after all as you say if lots of people get together and sign it on mass in blocks that is proof isn't it that people are getting together and signing it. I dare say when eventually the petition is finally put forward for scrutiny we will see that lots of these people all got together and used the same computer to log on and sign up. Such is the feeling on the street.

After all look at the despicable anti's. Pervs and nutters all 19 of them, yet they seem to run a myriad of capable websites and blogs around the world and manage to post again and again.

I urge anyone and every nutter to send people to the McCannfiles as there is so much info on there and the recent Tannergate scandal of how her words were twisted in translation are worth a read. A little micro view of how the whole media machine is being managed.

Clarence Darling x wrote:A little quote from the master of publicity and media representation. The very pretty and not at all nylon rug attired Clarence Michelle.

"All you hear about is the critics, so it is very satisfying to see all the people out there showing support"

Mr Michelle said the petition will continue to run until the signatures stop coming in.....so he has failed utterly if "All you hear is the critics". But the silent masses..22,000 in the first day, and now 36,000 are there ready to rally to the cause. With the signatures probably set to pour in for ever and ever, it will never get sent to Portugal and thus the request for a review will never actually be recieved, thus thus there may never actually be a review. Is there a flaw in that plan Clarence?

All they can do to fight the good cause is attack and abuse those who ask questions, now they seek to attack the remarkable soursce of information the McCannfiles. Perhaps there is just too much information on the site. Perhaps they want people to realise that the lovely Ms Tanner was miss quoted, and selected parts of her rogatory interview have been used and abused.

I must confess i did not realise she spoke fluent Portuguese and her statements were given in that language and then translated a few times back into English in various forms for some odd reason. I have got that right haven't i? Must go, got to go sign a petition a few hundred times x

If she speaks fluent Portuguese, why was Robert Murat used as interpretator?
Surely she could have volunteered to help her friends during the statements process?

Who did the translation into English btw?

Ah she was too busy remembering that she had seen a man, or maybe a woman, or maybe posh spice. All very difficult being an ideal witness you know. It's the fault of the bumbling discredited detectives they probably didn't ask her if she spoke fluent Portuguese. Perhaps if the family and chums had been out looking earlier, she would have realised sooner what she had to look out for earlier...and not later?

I think that makes sense, can't wait for the book it is so exciting! I expect we will find out she did see Raymond Hewitt for definite.

candyfloss wrote:
Anyone read this....................

[url=http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread628700/pg1

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

Excellent article candy. Thanks. I particularly like this bit:

the scent of death was found on the "Cuddle Cat" toy when the villa, rented by the McCanns after they moved out of Ocean Club 5A, was searched by the sniffer dogs.

In other words, the Cuddle Cat was never out of the McCann's custody. It appears from the videos of sniffer dog, Eddy, working, that the police had custody of some of the McCann's clothing, but not the Cuddle Cat. Hence, it appears there was no opportunity by the police to contaminate Cuddle Cat.

Candy. I hope it's ok to C&P that excellent article here.

Disclaimer: The following is speculation only. The public are not privy to all details in the case of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

There is much that is open to public view, but in criminal investigations ongoing, police always withold important facts from the public in order to screen suspects and eliminate the innocent.

Similarly, decisions taken behind closed doors by political figures or decisions assumed to have been taken, can only be speculated upon.

No imputations of guilt can validly be taken from what follows.

Reiterating, because of uncertainty as to the complete facts of this case, the following is posted here in the spirit of speculative discussion only. It is not to be taken as an allegation of wrongdoing.

Anyone who has taken more than a casual glance at the case of the missing Madeleine McCann, the little girl who disappeared on the night of May 3, 2007, in Prahia da Luz, Portugal, in the Algarve region, has been exposed to a number of confusing and counter-intuitive circumstantial indicators.

This post is an attempt to do some "vector addition" on these indicators to see if evident indirection leads to evidence of direction.

Let's look at the sniffer dog "testimony":

"Ask the dogs, Sandra." Gerry's well known response to a question about the sniffer dog indications points to the obvious drawback of relying too heavily on evidence from sniffer dogs.

Sensitive they might be but loquacious they are not.

The cadaver dog, Eddy, indicated the scent of death on articles of clothing belonging to Madeleine and Kate and on a shelf in a closet and behind a couch in the living/sitting room. He found the scent on the key to their rental vehicle and in a flowerbed at the foot of the stairs leading to the sliding doors of the apartment. He found it on Madeleine's plush toy, Cuddle Cat.

No scent was found on any bed or on any of Gerry's clothing.

The one indicator that is almost never discussed among the collection is the one in the flowerbed. Occasionally it is mentioned that Madeleine might have fallen off the landing at the top of the stairs, into the flower bed below, where she died.

But that would mean that she couldn't have died behind the couch, usually seen as the most likely place where her death might be supposed to have occurred and if she died in the flower bed, surely they wouldn't have taken her inside and stuffed her behind the couch, where the scent was found.

However, her body could have been found behind the couch and later deposited briefly in the flowerbed, enroute to being concealed in some other place. The flowerbed indication was characterized as faint, by the dog handler.

If that is what happened, why was the scent also indicated on a shelf in a cupboard in the parent's bedroom? Was Madeleine also hidden there? Was she in the missing blue kit bag, sitting on that shelf, as people frantically searched the apartment and neighborhood?

One could argue that it might be possible for the police to plant the cadaver scent everywhere it was found, in an effort to frame the McCanns. I'm not sure if they could have done that, but for the sake of argument let's say that it is true.

Why the flowerbed? Why plant scent there and why was the indication faint? It seems a whimsical choice for a frame-up. Would a cop framing them be smart enough to realize someone carrying Madeleine's body out of 5A, might put it down in the flowerbed, briefly while they check to see that the coast was clear for a brisk walk down the allyway just over the wall?

Maybe. The unlikliest people can be much smarter than we credit.

If a frame-up is in fact what happened, it was done very carefully, with a whole scenario and sequence of movements in mind. The discovery of the body behind the couch, the concealment of the body in the cupboard, the brief deposit of the body in the flowerbed, prior to transport elsewhere.

To plant evidence that paints a detailed, complex picture like that would require high intelligence. Personally, I doubt that a policeman that intelligent, would go to those lengths in a case like this. But that doesn't mean it's impossible.

This move to frame them would have been a reaction to the peculiar behavior of the McCanns following the abduction, the statements made by Kate McCann about the bedroom window and shutter being broken and on the McCann's refusal to follow police advice against advertising Madeleine's distinctive eye, the mark of the coloboma. These behaviors might well signal guilt to the police, well before the appearance of the sniffer dogs.

It could, as well, have been a reaction to British diplomatic interference in the case and British press criticism of the Policia Judiciaria. This is not nice but it is comprehensible on an emotional level.

It still seems an incredible stretch for all of the above to be ingredients of a frame-up. Wouldn't a policeman trying to frame the couple leave the scent on something of Gerry's? Maybe not.

Maybe this hypothetical and diabolical frame-up artist stacked the evidence against one person to try to split the couple, to encourage one to testify against the other.

One particular fact emerges clearly and unequivocally from the sniffer dog indications, though.

The dogs are not dumb. Not one of their indications points away from the McCanns. There is complete consistency in what they find. The margin of error involved with them is zero. They did not alert to anything or any place that is not connected with the McCanns.

Just to elaborate a little on that, one could say that if they had alerted to one of the other cars assembled the day they sniffed at cars, or to one of the other apartments at the Ocean Club or to some random individual on the street, who could be proven to have had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance, then one could admit a shadow of a doubt that Madeleine had died in apartment 5A.

One could say, "Well see, these dogs are not always right, and more importantly, they are going astray in this particular case."

But no, while it is true that the dogs may not always be right, in this case their consistency on multiple alerts argues against error. It argues against any element of chance figuring at all in their indications.

I really don't believe there is an argument against this.

One of three things happened in this case:

1. Madeleine died in the apartment or near it (and was carried into the apartment) and then removed and hidden by her parents.

2. Madeleine died in the apartment and was removed by an unknown criminal.

3. Madeleine was abducted, alive, by a criminal but the scent of death was planted in the apartment by the police because they were convinced that the parents were culpable in the case.

Taking these options in reverse order:

The third option can be eliminated, in my opinion, because the scent of death was found on the "Cuddle Cat" toy when the villa, rented by the McCanns after they moved out of Ocean Club 5A, was searched by the sniffer dogs.

In other words, the Cuddle Cat was never out of the McCann's custody. It appears from the videos of sniffer dog, Eddy, working, that the police had custody of some of the McCann's clothing, but not the Cuddle Cat. Hence, it appears there was no opportunity by the police to contaminate Cuddle Cat.

Kate has said that she had contact with dead bodies in the course of her work in the period before the trip to the Algarve and could have transmitted the scent to Cuddle Cat herself in a way that had nothing to do with Madeleine. But surely, if that were the case, the scent should be on any number of other items in Kate's possession and not only on the small number of articles of clothing where it was found. Surely it would be on things belonging to Gerry.

The few instances of the death scent indicated by the dogs argues against contamination from Kate's medical practice. There should be more of them if that were the route through which the scent got to the McCann's things.

On the other hand, the instance of the scent on Cuddle Cat argues against contamination by the police, since they didn't have access to Cuddle Cat.

(The notion that Martin Grime, the dog handler, might be involved in a frame up is way too far fetched in this case, although, to be fair, there is a well known case in the US of a corrupt sniffer dog handler.)

The logic of these considerations, argues against contamination by the police as a reason for the instances of detection of the scent of death in this case.


The second option, Madeleine's death in the apartment and removal by an unknown criminal is a reasonable possibility.

Perhaps a kidnapper was unable to get her out of the apartment without waking her up. Perhaps a chase ensued. Perhaps Madeleine was killed as a result of rough treatment in that process, or some accident. Perhaps the kidnapper did not realize that she was dead, in his haste, and simply scooped up the inert body and took it away with him.

This sequence of events harmonizes well with the reported sitings of a person or persons carrying a child who appeared to be asleep.

This scenario is completely believable, except for the distribution of the scent of death on Kate's clothing and in the cupboard in the parent's bedroom. It is difficult to see how the scent of Madeleine's dead body could get to those things and that place in such a scenario.

This is particularly true of the scent in the cupboard. Surely a kidnapper would not lug the victim's body around with him as he rummaged through articles of clothing and looked in one cupboard.

On those grounds, I would eliminate option two.

The first option is a touchy subject. Many of the great and good and wealthy have lent support to the notion that option one is not what happened. The British government and the British press, by and large seem to be of the view that option one could not be what happened.

Ah but the scent of rotting human flesh is quite simply explained by Kate McCann taking Cuddle Cat into work with her and meeting a good half dozen dead patients. Happens all the time you know.

I expect in "An account of the Truth", to be published not very soon, we will be given details of the several dead patients encountered, all questions will be answered and everything will be cleared up. Easy Peesey.

Clarence Darling x wrote:Ah but the scent of rotting human flesh is quite simply explained by Kate McCann taking Cuddle Cat into work with her and meeting a good half dozen dead patients. Happens all the time you know.

I expect in "An account of the Truth", to be published not very soon, we will be given details of the several dead patients encountered, all questions will be answered and everything will be cleared up. Easy Peesey.

Indeed CD. Did anybody ever check up on the 6 corpuses that Dr. Kate came into contact with just before she went on her holiday to PLD? Did any one of the relatives of the deceased patients come forward to say that Dr. McCann had indeed been in contact with them?

Doubt the relatives did...bit awkward for them.... 'yep we called the doc, she rushed round with a cuddly toy but turns out granny had been dead in the spare room a few days. We would have noticed but we were out on the lash...anyone seen Gran's tennis bag?

Now first of all one has to ascertain where Doc was working in say the two weeks before holiday, and then check register of deaths in that area, sounds like a job for a journalist....so i guess we will never know!

Nobody even managed to trace the Heart Attack Man that Dr Gerry "helped" on the plane. And as far as we know he is still alive. So what chance do our intrepid reporters have of tracing six dead people.

I thought Kate was working part time, would be very difficult imo to come across that many deaths if working full time let alone part time, also what adult takes a cuddly toy into work with them!

Cherry wrote:I thought Kate was working part time, would be very difficult imo to come across that many deaths if working full time let alone part time, also what adult takes a cuddly toy into work with them!

Good evening Cherry. This is a long read and I don't know how to give the link and either all the text or part of it, so please bare with me and have a read [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
It does keep repeating that the doctor/gp to certify death has to be the one who treated the patient in their last illness. I have always thought it very odd that she attended so many patients who died within the weeks before her holidays, let alone what she had been wearing when attending. Anyway the link,

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

Thanks for the link olivebranch, also mentions about a GP not always having to see a deceased patient as well - imo it would be highly unlikely that Kate attended as many deaths as she has alleged, and we have to my knowledge not seen any confirmation of this at all.

Cherry wrote:I thought Kate was working part time, would be very difficult imo to come across that many deaths if working full time let alone part time, also what adult takes a cuddly toy into work with them!

I was under the impression that the McCanns were on holiday in Ireland, a week before they flew to PDL and on their return, Madeleine was given "Cuddle Cat" as an early birthday present by John Corner, just before she and her family flew to PDL. So I fail to see how Kate McCann could have taken the soft toy to work with her, when she was supposed to be on holiday.

Whether Kate McCann was working or not, I don't believe she would have taken a soft toy with her when she went to the homes of the deceased patients. If she went to the homes of the 6 deceased patients.

Could some kind soul point me to a reliable link pertaining to where she said that she, or rather her trousers and cuddlecat, had been in contact with six corpses?
Many thanks in advance

listener wrote:Could some kind soul point me to a reliable link pertaining to where she said that she, or rather her trousers and cuddlecat, had been in contact with six corpses?
Many thanks in advance

What about the discoveries of the “cadaver” sniffer dog?
Mr and Mrs McCann were shown a police video of a sniffer dog used to find corpses “going crazy” when it approached the hire car. Reports also claim that is discovered the scent on the vehicle’s key fob. Mrs McCann is reported to have explained that in her work as locum GP she came into contact with six corpses in the weeks leading up to Algarve holiday.

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

Cadaver-sniffing dogs brought in by investigators, however, reportedly responded to Kate's clothing, then became agitated when they were given the scent of the McCanns' car key fob. During 16 hours of police questioning over two days, says Philomena McCann, "Kate was repeatedly shown the sniffer dog video." Kate McCann reportedly explained to police that, as a GP, she came in contact with six bodies shortly before leaving for Portugal. As a senior Scotland Yard investigator points out, cadaver dogs can't tell one corpse from another and have little value in tying a suspect to a specific body. "Dogs can sniff out death," he says. "However, you can't ask a dog to stand up in court and give evidence."

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

Thanks candyfloss [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
So possibly a tabloid invension?

candyfloss wrote:Cadaver-sniffing dogs brought in by investigators, however, reportedly responded to Kate's clothing, then became agitated when they were given the scent of the McCanns' car key fob. During 16 hours of police questioning over two days, says Philomena McCann, "Kate was repeatedly shown the sniffer dog video." Kate McCann reportedly explained to police that, as a GP, she came in contact with six bodies shortly before leaving for Portugal. As a senior Scotland Yard investigator points out, cadaver dogs can't tell one corpse from another and have little value in tying a suspect to a specific body. "Dogs can sniff out death," he says. "However, you can't ask a dog to stand up in court and give evidence."

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

Philomena - ( Gosh what a name ) [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] , is right of course , one cannot ask a dog to stand up in court and give evidence .

However Phil , if you happen to read this take note , records of the canine teams reliability , the type and amount of training the team have experienced before and after certification may be used as admissable evidence.

All Britsh police dogs must be licenced to work operationally and to obtain this licence they have to pass tests at the completion of their training and again every year . The standards required to become operational are all laid down by the ACPO and are reviewed regularly to ensure training and licencing reflect the most appropriate methods and standards. Oh and confirmed operational outcomes can be used as a factor in determining capability .