Madeleine McCann - 13th Anniversary of her disappearance, but when did this really happen?

As we approach what the McCanns will claim to be the 13th Anniversary of Madeleines' disappearance on May 3rd 2007, we ask the question:

Did Madeleine McCann really disappear 4 days earlier, on Sunday 29th April 2007?

Examine the evidence that we will post here over the next few days.  We start with Richard D Hall's excellent documentary "When Madeleine died?"




Tomorrow, we will bring you extracts from the well researched, excellent e-book by our member Petermac

Today we bring you 2 chapters from the well researched and detailed e-book by our Member Pertermac.

The full book is available for free download are can be read online here:

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.com

Chapter 12: The Pool Photo - Floppy sun hats and flapping curtains ?
The Pool Photo - Floppy sun hats and flapping curtains ?

Preamble

This chapter emerged from the more formal Last Photo, Pool Photo work, when we started looking at weather charts, wind surfing competitions at Portimao, personal diaries of ex-pats, and the descriptions of temperature and weather in the Tapas group's statements and Rogatories.
It was soon realised that regardless of anything else, the wind and weather are capable of proving - on the balance of probabilities at the very least -
that the Last Pool photo cannot have been taken at lunchtime on 3/5/7
and that the curtains cannot have 'whooshed' at 10 pm on 3/5/7

Both are independent of any other considerations, and this Chapter can stand alone for this reason.

The Last Photo - revisited



Kate states that the Last Photo, of Gerry, Amelie, and Madeleine sitting by the children’s pool, was taken, by her, on Thursday 3rd May 2007

“We then sat round the toddler pool for a while, dipping our feet in, and I took what has turned out to be my last photograph to date of Madeleine.”

The time in the EXIF metadata is shown as 13:29, but the McCanns were at great pains to point out that this time was one hour wrong, and it was actually taken at 14:29

Date/Time Original 2007:05:03 13:29:51+01:00

The photo shows Gerry wearing sunglasses, T shirt and shorts, with a slight sheen of perspiration across his forehead, the children in sun hats, which are casting shadows, there are clear shadows cast by the tree, and by the sun beds.

The edges of the shadows are sharp, indicating bright sun.

However, the weather records for Thursday 3rd May 2007 in Praia da Luz tell a totally different story.



At 1pm the temperature was 17º C, (62ºF) This is relatively cold.
At 2pm the temperature had risen to 18ºC (64ºF) Again not hot enough for sweat to break out on the brow of a man wearing nothing more than a thin cotton T shirt and shorts.

Across the top of the figure is a grey bar which indicates the cloud cover.
At 1pm and 2pm it is shown as 50%

By 4:30pm it was 90% so we may deduce that at lunchtime there may have been cloud cover somewhat greater than 50% and increasing as the afternoon progressed.

It also shows TWO separate cloud layers, one at 540m which then rises to 740m, and a higher one at 2700m

The record for the entire holiday week is even more instructive.



Here we see a clear pattern of the temperature falling and the cloud cover increasing between Sunday evening 29 April, and the following Friday morning 4 May

When we consider the Last Photo we must ask the following questions.
What do we SEE
What do we KNOW
and then
What can we DEDUCE ?

We see
Shadows have sharp outlines
Shadows more or less vertical
Bright reflection from human skin
Bright reflection from objects
Sheen of perspiration on Gerry's forehead
Children in very light dress
Children in sun hats
Gerry wearing very dark sunglasses
Gerry wearing T shirt and shorts
Bright and sharp reflection in sunglasses
Father and children with feet in the water

We know
The pool was very cold - all week
Weather for the rest of the week was cold and cloudy

What do we deduce ?
The photo was taken on a pleasantly warm or even a hot day.
It was taken when the sun was more or less overhead. Solar Zenith was at 13:29 for the days in question. Therefore, in layman’s terms the sun was overhead between 12:30 and 2:30 pm
There were no low clouds and there was no high overcast

But surely wind speed and direction depend on other factors, buildings, vegetation . .

You make a very valid point.
Wind speed IS measured about 3m from the ground, and in an open area, for the obvious reasons that you give. The ground has a frictional resistance, there are walls, buildings, street furniture, and then hedges and trees, all of which will act to slow the apparent speed at human level
The wind speed and direction at lunchtime is given as 7.2 m/s, or a stiff breeze, Force 4, and the direction approximately WSW, or bearing 250

On the map it is coming in along the red line (the arrow is pointing the wrong way !)



In fact this is across a large patch of waste land, tennis courts and then the very low wall by the Tennis courts in the Ocean club, which are protected only by chain link fencing. The vegetation, although there is some, is low.






As we can see there is not much of a barrier to reduce the force of the wind.

And I suppose that even reducing Force 4 would only bring it down to Force 3

Well exactly, and if we look again at Madeleine’s very fine hair falling across her face, and her floppy little sun hat, we are entitled to ask whether they were sitting in any wind at all.



But if I may digress slightly, this raises another very interesting point,

Let us stick with the issue of wind force and direction .. .

Later that evening, around 10pm Kate tells us what happened when she entered the apartment.

Her first statement said the curtains were wide open,
[Quote]and immediately noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did.”

But later we have seen repeated interviews, and read in the autobiography, which say they were tight closed.

but I just noticed that the door, the bedroom door where the three children were sleeping, was open much further than we’d left it.
I went to close it to about here, and then as I got to here, it suddenly . . . slammed, . . . . and literally as I went back in, the curtains of the bedroom which were drawn, [demonstrates with both forearms together] that were closed, “wheesh’ like a gust of wind kind of blew them open.

[extract from book] p. 71 “Then I noticed that the door to the children’s bedroom was open quite wide, not how we had left it. At first I assumed that Matt must have moved it. I walked over and gently began to pull it to. Suddenly it slammed shut, as if caught by a draught.”


She says the door slammed even though she was holding it, and when she pushed it open again another gust “whooshed” the curtains into the room.



By 10pm the wind had died down, and was 4 m/s, Force 2, bordering on the low end of Force 3. It has also veered to WNW, or bearing 290.



Assuming the window was open, it is only 1 m x 0.5 m, so half a square meter. The door is 2 m x 0.75 m so one and a half square metres.

So any wind pressure entering the room is effectively dissipated over three times the area,
Now let us look at photos of the area outside the bedroom window.

What we see is a small car park lined with thick and high trees, a substantial wall, and then another wall just outside the window of the apartment















So the argument which says the effective speed and power of the wind is reduced by vegetation, walls, street furniture, cars and other obstacles applied here with even greater force.

This apartment window was by any standards very well sheltered

And from that we then have to imagine what wind power or force would be necessary to tear through all that barrier - and remember the wind is coming in at an angle across that road, across other areas with high buildings and thick vegetation, it is the purple line on this map



And the wind still has to have the force to get in through a small open window, and then slam a door being held by an adult, and on the second occasion to pull full length curtains from where they were jammed between the bed and the wall, or jammed behind the wicker chair, against the wall, so that they can “Whoosh”



And that wind force, would then one assumes also hit the Tapas bar around the same time, and we remember that the bar was encased in about 40 square metres of clear tarpaulin. Yet not a single guest or member of staff reports what would have been a deafening sound as those two gusts hit.

The Weather reports from Faro Airport are similarly silent on the point.

So it has been an interesting excursion, driven by responding to reasoned arguments that the wind conditions might have permitted the Last Photo to have been taken on Thursday 3rd, but leading not only to a serious suspicion, on those grounds alone that it could not have been, but also to some serious doubts about the slamming door and whooshing curtain story.

There just does not seem to be enough evidence to substantiate either,

as with so much else in this continuing Mystery.

What is even more interesting is to note that the McCanns’ entire story involving the Last Photo, and flapping curtains depends on flat calm and hot at lunchtime, and high wind at bedtime.

The facts are
EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE.
 



Chapter 26 : What do I think happened to Madeleine ?
Over the past decade I have looked at this case and dissected bits of it, trying to decide what parts of the story are credible and to distinguish them from what is frankly not, and to try to see which parts were pure fabrication.

So I am now prepared to rise to the challenge, and to present my “purported’ theory.

I thank all those who have led me to this point, but stress that this, and all the mistakes and inaccuracies which may be found are entirely mine.

I would hope that any inaccuracy or misinterpretation could be pointed out or explained, so I may revise my idea, as everyone should on being confronted with new evidence.

What do I think happened to Madeleine ?

On Saturday night she did not sleep - a combination of excitement and her documented habit of wandering into the parents’ room during the night

Discussion - Kate tells us this in her book, (p. 59) and there is evidence from the “Star Chart” in the Rothley house, and family members. Excitement and over-tiredness on the first day of a holiday is normal

On Sunday evening she and the twins were therefore all given a sedative with their documented ‘cup of tea and a biscuit’. The twins sleep. This continued during the week.

Discussion - Kate tells us in the book that she suspected sedation from the start. Both she and Fiona Payne are qualified anaesthetists; Kate specialised in paediatrics. Strangely neither report that they took any of the medically appropriate steps towards the twins on the night of 3/5/7, leading to a inference that both know exactly what had been given and therefore had no concerns.

Madeleine did not sleep well and during the evening got out of bed, went into the parent’s room, found they were not there, and climbed onto the sofa to look out of the window to see where they were.

Discussion - One of the early theories involved Madeleine ‘wandering off’. Even if those particular shutters had been closed she would not be aware of them, only of the curtains, and would have tried to look out. We were told definitively that Madeleine could not have opened the sliding doors, even though they were allegedly unlocked.

She fell down the back of the sofa, and because the gap was narrow and she was sleepy, was unable to break her fall with her hands. She may have struck her head or face first on the sill as she slipped forward. She landed head first on the terrazzo floor, and some time during the night died of a sub-arachnoid haemorrhage, with light bleeding from the ear and possibly the nose and mouth.

Discussion - The ‘Eeyore’ pyjamas were washed because of the “large brown stain” (p.63) and then dried and photographed on the blue sofa, but then they became confused about what they had said, and why they would have taken a photo of the pyjamas in the first place, and subsequently held them up at a news conference in Berlin on 6th June 2007, describing them as “the ones she was abducted in”. This was confirmed by uncle John McCann when he reported that Amelie had been dressed in the garments and had immediately identified them saying “Maddie’s jammies. Where is Maddie ?”

Bleeding would have been confined to some small leakage from an ear - possibly including cerebrospinal fluid, typical of brain damage - and from the mouth and nose, which stops once the heart stops.

The parents came back late, crept very quietly into their room and went to bed without checking the children

Discussion - There is evidence from other sources that on some nights the parents stayed out into the early hours, and in the book this is admitted (p.60)

In the morning they see the empty bed, and during the frantic search find Madeline’s body behind the sofa, by now stiff and cold and leaking bodily fluids.

In her grief Kate holds and cuddles the body tightly to herself, covering her own clothes and cuddle-cat in cadaverine, which is detected a long time later. She then stays with the twins in the bedroom, getting them dressed and ready, and cuddling them both, holding them all tight to her. Cadaverine is transferred to the red T shirt worn by Sean at this stage, which was alerted to later, and to whatever Amelie was wearing.

Meanwhile Gerry puts Madeleine’s little body into the blue Tennis bag, and places it under the bushes in the garden, so that it will not be seen by the cleaner - if she comes, nor by the twins.

Discussion - The little gate at the bottom of the steps keeps everyone out. In Spain and Portugal there are very few dogs roaming around. The chances of a random intruder entering, searching, finding a bag of ‘stuff’ under a bush and deciding to steal it - without looking inside are - in the author’s estimation, slightly less than the chances of an abduction = 0.

During Monday the bag is left in the flower bed, and the cleaner does not see it. The sofa is pushed fully back against the curtains and the cleaner does not bother pulling it out to clean behind it. Kate goes to the supermarket to make purchases (p. 56) - perhaps including cleaning fluids.

Discussion - The bag may have been brought indoors for Monday night, and placed on the shelf. Bodies do not begin to smell strongly for some time. But if left in the garden it would have assisted the cooling, as the air temperature fell to 10º C (50º F) during the night of 30/4/7/- 1/5/7

There was a suggestion that the cleaner might have been sent away on the Monday. In any event a quick clean two days into a one week holiday does not involve anything much more than beds, bathroom and kitchen area. Moving furniture and cleaning underneath and behind it is confined to the day of departure or a deep “spring’ clean. Even if the cleaner did move the sofa, she would simply mop with bleach.

Personal problems, stains, spills, leakages, soiled sheets and towels are nothing to comment about if you are a cleaner in a holiday resort. The amount of leakage is unlikely to have been much, would probably have been mopped up by the parents, and with three very young children, two in night-time nappies, in an apartment a certain amount of ‘soiling’ would be well within a middle aged Portuguese cleaner’s comprehension and be totally unremarkable.

Robert Murat is summoned, and arrives early on Tuesday. He offers the assistance of a nearby hotel, which has outhouses and chest freezers. Gerry, in full tennis kit, and carrying the tennis bag is able to take Madeleine there and conceal her. Possibly by taxi, or perhaps in Murat’s rented car, and giving some meaning to Gerry’s quote: “I’m not going to answer that . . .” when asked whether he knew Murat previously.

Discussion - Murat had rented a car, as his own was allegedly in for repair (according to his statement). Some may argue that the body might have started to smell by that stage, but Tuesday is only 36 hrs post mortem. Some studies of dead piglets have reported that putrefaction only starts being noticeable to humans at 2-3 days, (but discoverable by dogs within 90 minutes of death ). https://australianmuseum.net.au/image/

Bin liners and air fresheners are on sale in the supermarket.
Gerry’s answer may be viewed at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qNhoWz0rQw&feature=related

Gerry returns and spends much of the next few days playing tennis at every opportunity to establish his credentials. The now empty tennis bag is placed on the shelf, and the process of scent transference starts

Discussion - despite the denials, the blue tennis bag is clearly visible on the photos taken during the night of 3-4/5/7. It then disappears from the record and like the pink Princess blanket has never been traced. The spot on which the blue tennis bag is shown is the exact point at which the cadaver dog alerts - and it alerts to no other place in that room. The depth of detail in the book about each of the tennis sessions is extremely suspicious. On one day he was reported to have had an injury to the Achilles tendon, which prevented his playing tennis during the afternoon, but was able to resume later that same day. This has not been confirmed.

The conspiracy is hatched with the entire group. After the dreadful event of the Sunday night they all pull together and ensure nothing else could ever happen like that to the other children . . . and begin to work out the strategy. This includes all the children being looked after by one adult every evening.

Discussion - There is much circumstantial evidence to support this theory. It is concealed in statements about recurrent illness accounting for the absence at dinner every night of at least one of the group.

The planning stage concentrates on large issues, but neglects details like cuddle cat, the pink blanket, and the pyjamas. It also neglects the weather, ambient temperature, evidence to be deduced from the lack of photographs and video recording, and the sheer implausibility of the half hourly checks being made by everyone every evening. It becomes overcomplicated with far too much detail and precision being offered.

Discussion - At some stage during that week the Pool Photo - which may be the last or penultimate photo of Madeleine, is selected as ‘proof’ of her continued existence on 3/5/7, and an elaborate strategy is developed, firstly to ensure the Polícia Judiciária never obtain a copy, (included in GM’s second statement in which he affirms and signs that he has no further photos in his possession, only to produce the Pool Photo via Mitchell exactly three weeks later ) and secondly to falsify the time and date. It is clear that the Pool Photo CANNOT POSSIBLY have been taken at lunchtime on 3/5/7, and is most likely or almost certainly - considerably beyond the test of the ‘balance of probabilities’ - to have been taken at lunchtime on Sunday 29th April.

The date for the discovery is deliberately chosen to allow the Police one whole day to take statements before they had to allow people to leave on Saturday, but not to allow them two whole days to conduct follow up interviews or detain witnesses when inconsistencies began to show.

Discussion - The Tapas 7 mostly return to the UK on Saturday 5/5/7 as planned and are replaced with close McCann family members who close ranks

I think this fits with what we know. Whether it is accurate or near the truth is an entirely different issue.
What I do not know is WHY ?

Today we bring you an article produced by a group of professional people who have researched the case in great detail for many years.  They are known as The Madeleine McCann research group (MMRG).  This group, consisting of a number of professional people, has uncovered strong evidence that Madeleine may have died on April 29th 2007, four days before being reported missing.

A short paper by the Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG)

DID MADELEINE MCCANN DIE ON SUNDAY 29 APRIL, FOUR DAYS BEFORE SHE WAS REPORTED MISSING? –  STRONG EVIDENCE THAT SHE DID
 

The Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG) was set up in 2009, around the time that I created what was to become the most popular Madeleine McCann discussion forum on the internet: ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’ (CMOMM). https://jillhavern.forumotion.net

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.

CMOMM has a section on its forum titled: “McCann Case: The most important areas of research’. https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/f57-mccann-case-the-most-important-areas-of-research
 
New research in this section points to Madeleine’s death being on the Sunday or Monday and not Thursday 3rd May.

We now wish to take this research a stage further, and below is a short paper expressing the views of the Madeleine McCann Research Group.
Jill Havern, forum owner

[/size]

 --------------------------------


The views of the Madeleine McCann Research Group, August 2016


Before we explain our conclusions in detail, we have over the years seen many fine researchers come and go on the forum. Some of those who have followed the Madeleine McCann case 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 case, and in the forum, and some very productive research has been 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 Madeleine McCann researchers, both on the forum and elsewhere.

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 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. 

http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.co.uk

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 both de Almeida’s report and Amaral’s book say occurred within four hours of her being reported missing. We explain in this paper why her death must have been earlier.

The claim that Madeleine had died - and died 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 more specific conclusions on where the evidence leads.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12362-new-film-by-richard-d-hall-when-madeleine-died

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 others who have given freely of their time and expertise.

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



Here are our main conclusions: 

1. There is no doubt that Madeleine died on that holiday

The 17 alerts by two cadaver dogs, used by dog top handler Martin Grime, to the odour of a corpse and to 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 ever died in that apartment.

That conclusion is greatly enhanced by the McCanns’ first and subsequent reactions to these dramatic findings, which we have set out in detail elsewhere. When they were told that the smell of death and blood had been found in their apartment and hire car, they hurriedly came up with a series of improbable explanations for this:  

1. blood spatters on the walls could have been caused by mosquitoes crashing into the wall
   
2. Madeleine had nosebleeds
   
3. Madeleine has grazed her knee climbing up the steps to the aeroplane
   
4. The dogs has alerted to rotting meat, not the odour of a corpse
   
5. The dogs had alerted to dirty nappies, not the odour of a corpse
   
6. Kate McCann had certified six deaths in the two weeks before going on holiday, that’s why the ‘smell of death was on her clothes’
   
7. Kate McCann used to carry Madeleine’s favourite cuddly toy, ‘Cuddle Cat’, to work with her whilst she visited homes to issue death certificates, that’s why the smell of death was on Cuddle Cat.
   

Later, the McCanns completely changed their tune. Kate McCann said that the dogs were only alerting to the conscious or unconscious signals from the dog handler, Martin Grime, a claim that basically accused Martin Grime of gross professional incompetence.

Gerry McCann tried to claim that cadaver dogs, and sniffer dogs generally, were ‘incredibly unreliable’. He tried to prove this by quoting from a legal judgment in the United States, in the case of Eugene Zapata, accused of murdering his wife. A cadaver dog had alerted to the odour of a corpse which suggested that Eugene Zapata had moved his wife’s body twice. A judge refused to hear the dog handler’s evidence, saying that sniffer dogs’ evidence was too unreliable. Gerry McCann gleefully quoted this case to try and prove his claim that cadaver dogs were unreliable. Just months after this, Eugene Zapata made a full confession which proved that the cadaver dogs’ evidence had been 100% correct. Despite this, Kate McCann had the effrontery to mention this case in her 2011 book on the case, ‘madeleine’. However, she (of course) failed to mention that the dog had been right all along.

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 died on the holiday is also strongly supported by a wealth of circumstantial evidence. To even list, let alone explain, all the circumstantial evidence would take pages. It includes such things as:

A A huge number of contradictory statements by the McCanns, their friends (David and Fiona Payne and Fiona’s mother Dianne Webster, Russell O’Brien and Jane Tanner, and Matthew and Rachael Oldfield), and others closely associated with them.

B Numerous changes of story by the McCanns, their friends, and others closely associated with them.

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

D In the same interview, she was asked a 49th question: “Are you aware that in not answering these questions you are jeopardising the investigation into your daughters disappearance?” Kate McCann answered: “Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks”.

E Spending vast sums of money - much of it from the public - on expensive lawyers (including Michael Caplan QC, the top barrister who successfully stopped General Pinochet being extradited to Chile) and PR advisers, when none of these could have realistically helped to find Madeleine

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


Madeleines’ 4th Birthday – Just 9 days after her parents reported her disappearance and claimed that she had been abducted by a paedophile gang.

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

H The huge involvement of the government and security services in this case, including Gordon Brown’s personal interventions in the Portuguese investigation at the request of Gerry McCann, and the involvement of MI5, Special Branch, and the government-backed Control Risks group. Tony and Cherie Blair also gave personal support to the McCanns, while David Cameron set up the five-year-long Metropolitan Police investigation into Madeleine’s reported disappearance. Operation Grange, which has cost around £13 million but has got absolutely nowhere

I 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 initiative in support of the McCanns. This support continued even after the McCanns became the Portuguese police’s prime suspects when the McCanns were arrested and made official suspects on 7 September 2007. Mitchell once boasted that his job was to ‘control what comes out in the media’. He most certainly has done that in the Madeleine McCann case.

J 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 McCanns’ memory cards before they were given to the police, on 9 May. They refused to hand over their photographs without first selecting exactly what they wanted the police to see and what they didn’t want them to see. In addition, the Portuguese police appear to have received the images on a black-and-white program which only reproduced them as grainy ‘greyscale’ images which made them very difficult to analyse.


Continued:>

Goncalo Amaral’s view

These are the relevant extracts from Goncalo Amaral’s book (AnnaEsse’s translation):

“MADELEINE'S HOLIDAY

“On the fateful day of May 3rd, the attendance register at the play centre indicates that Madeleine arrived at 9.10, accompanied by her father. Her mother came to fetch her at 12.25 for lunch and took her back at 2 o'clock. After jogging on the beach and going to fetch the twins, she collected Maddie at 5.30pm. From that moment on, no other person saw the little girl, apart from her parents and their friends. What happened then in the apartment remains a mystery.

“THE INTERROGATIONS

“We finally decide to question her (Kate McCann) as a witness, but not to pose questions on the events after 5.30pm, the time at which she returned to the apartment with her three children.

“A DISAPPEARANCE, A WINDOW AND A BODY

"It is now important to present a summary of this case, based on our deductions: reject what is false, throw out what we can't show with sufficient certainty and validate that which can be proven.

“Point 5. The body, the existence of which has been confirmed by the EVRD and CSI dogs but also by the results of the preliminary laboratory analyses, cannot be found.
“The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:
“1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;

“2. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.

“3. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident…”

If she died after 6pm on Thursday 3 May, what would the McCanns and their friends have had to do in the four hours between 6pm and 10pm?

We will refer to the theory that Madeleine died from an accident (or worse) after 6pm on 3 May as ‘The PJ Theory’.

If Madeleine died after 6pm on 3 May, what would the McCanns have had to do?

First of all, what is known for sure about the period between 6pm and 10pm?

Do we know for sure that Madeleine was with her family in her apartment at 6pm?

Well, that depends on whether or not one accepts as gospel the claims of Gerry and Kate McCann, Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington that Madeleine was at a high tea in the Tapas restaurant from (according to Gerry McCann) 4.45pm onwards to about 6pm.

But for the purposes of this paper, we shall assume that she was there at 6pm..

Later on, the evidence suggests that the McCanns and their friends dined at the Tapas restaurant. There is agreement from the McCanns, their friends, other holidaymakers and Ocean Club staff that they were all settled at their table at around 8.30pm to 8.45pm.

So, if she had died, say shortly after 6pm, as suggested by both Goncalo Amaral and Tavares de Almeida, what would the McCanns have had to do first?

A preliminary point to raise is: were the twins present when, according to the PJ theory, Madeleine died? It seems unlikely. But, according to the PJ theory, they must have been.

So we suggest that all these things must have all happened, in approximately this order:

A. They would first have to decide if Madeleine really was dead, or could be revived or resuscitated. This may or may not have taken some time to decide.

B. They would have to deal with the initial shock of what had happened. Doctors, despite being trained not to show emotion over the circumstances of their patients, are also human beings, and in this case parents. There would have been a severe emotional reaction and initial panic, and maybe a series of irrational responses, before they could properly gather their thoughts and begin to come to terms with the shock of losing their daughter and start planning how to cover it up. How long this initial phase lasted can only be guessed at.

C. (If the twins were there) The McCanns would have had to make swift arrangements to move them out of the way whilst they decided what to do. That would take some time and probably they would have had to take them to one of their friends’ apartments.

D. There would then have to be a rapid decision-making process during which all the following decisions would have to be taken:

(i) Do we take her to hospital?

(ii) If so, what are the risks?

(iii) Can we pass this off as a genuine accident?

(iv) Is there any other reason why we dare not risk going to hospital and possibly facing a post-mortem?

(v) Would we be investigated by the police?

E. Then (assuming that they then decided that they are not going to inform the authorities of Madeleine’s death) there are more decisions to be made about what to do with Madeleine’s body:

(i) Hide it straightaway?

(ii) If so, where?

(iii) Or ’phone a trusted friend first and ask for advice?

(iv) Where can we get a car quickly so as to hide it?

(v) Have we got anything we can carry her body out in, without anybody thinking there might be a body in it?

(vi) Can we get all this done before 8.30pm, when we’re supposed to meet our friends for dinner?

Maybe they would have had other related questions.

F. Then there would be another very tricky question to answer:

(i) Who do we tell about this?

(ii) Just our very good friends David and Fiona?

(iii) Just our other good friends Russell and Jane?

(iv) All four of them?

(v) Matt and Rachael as well?

(vi) What can we say to the staff, to our other friends we’ve met on holiday?

G. They then will have to consider what possible excuse they could have for not having Madeleine anymore?

(i) They could say that Madeleine must have wandered off somewhere

(ii) They could say that they took her down to the beach and she got swept out to sea

(iii) Or could we get away with faking an abduction

Maybe other ideas might be discussed.

H. Let us presume at this point that they decided to tell all their friends: Dave, Fiona, Russell, Jane, Matt, Rachael (I assume at this point that those who say that Madeleine died after 6pm fully accept that the McCanns must have let all their Tapas 9 friends know what had happened to Madeleine - and that they all agreed on a plan - though I am aware that some still maintain that maybe, in this scenario, the McCanns didn’t say anything to any of their friends, none of whom therefore knew that Madeleine was dead).

I. In such a scenario, the McCanns would probably contact their friends on their mobiles. Or quickly nip round and knock on their doors.

J. Could they have discussed this desperate situation bilaterally? Surely not. They would surely have to have a meeting about it – at the very time they were all getting the children ready for bed and beginning to dress up for dinner.

K. In such a scenario, how likely is it that all six friends would have agreed within, say, 5-10 minutes that they would all play their roles in a fake abduction? We suggest that it is unlikely in the extreme. Even had they all rapidly agreed to go along with an abduction hoax later that evening at 10pm, there would be all manner of questions and suggestions.

We also need to bear in mind that on the basis of the PJ theory as it stands, this was a holiday to a place the McCanns had never been to before. AS far as we know, they knew no-one in the area who could help them. They had no immediate access to a car, and so on. Madeleine would have been happily playing with her brother and sister, her friends in the Lobsters club, and her Mum and Dad for six days.

L. So the McCanns and their friends would be rapidly tossing these sorts of ideas around:

(i) Where are going to hide the body?

(ii) What about down the beach?

(iii) In the sea, using a boat?

(iv) In a derelict house in Praia da Luz?

(v) Get hold of a car and drive the body somewhere well away from Praia da Luz.

M. Then, again assuming that they had all agreed to a plan of action, there would be loads more questions about (a) the apartment and (b) how to execute the hoax.

N. The apartment. If there had been a bad accident, or something equally bad had happened, who would clean the room?

(i) How would it be done?

(ii) Was there any blood to clear away?

O. Then there would be questions about how the abduction hoax was going to be performed.

(i) Who will raise the alarm?

(ii) What shall we all do after we raise the alarm? – Do we go frantically pretending to look for her?

(iii) Or do we ring the police?

(iv) Do we inform the Ocean Club?

(v) When shall we do all this?

(vi) Do we need someone to pretend to see an abductor?

(vii) Who will do it? Jane perhaps?

(viii) What time shall we get her to say she saw someone?

(ix) Where shall we say she saw the abductor?

P. What about a description of the abductor? Jane would need to have a believable description to give to the police.

Q. Then we come to them all sitting down for dinner at 8.30pm to 8.45pm. Do those who suggest Madeleine had died after 6pm honestly believe that all nine of the Tapas 9 could have, with every appearance of calm, nonchalantly sat down for dinner that night as though nothing had happened?

R. With the body already hidden by that time? - somewhere where no-one could find it?

S. The room forensically cleaned of any blood?

T. Cleaned the curtains of blood spatters and any other traces of what really happened?

U. The abduction hoax ready scripted and ready to carry out?

V. All of them back to their apartments and showering or washing and getting changed for dinner?

W. Getting all the children changed and ready for bed and asleep before they set off for dinner?

All of this seems highly unlikely.

X. Could they chat away merrily to the Carpenter family and their children, for example (as indeed they did that night), knowing that their first-born daughter had suddenly died within the past three hours? That also seems unlikely.

Y. Some suggest that maybe the body wasn’t hidden before 8.30pm, but lay there while they were eating, with someone - presumably Gerry McCann – later carrying his dead daughter to a temporary or final resting place somewhere after that.

Z. Some even suggest that Gerry McCann went back to the apartment during the meal, picked up his dead daughter, clad in her pyjamas, and carried her for about half a mile or more through the streets of Praia da Luz, being seen at 10pm by the Smith family, who negligently failed to do anything about their extraordinary sighting for 13 days afterwards.

That theory would require Gerry McCann to have made an extremely risky, not to say crass, decision to walk for some 15 or 20 minutes across the village, carrying his dead daughter, at the very moment that his wife and/or others was raising the alarm.

AA. Finally, they would have to arrange the ‘crime scene’, that is, the children’s bedroom, to make it look like an abduction had occurred - moved the beds. placed the two cots in position, placed a bed by the window, opened the shutters, windows and curtains to make it look like an abductor had broken into the apartment. In this respect, the fact that the only fingerprints found on the opened window was that of Kate McCann is highly significant. .

In addition to all these considerations, 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

If we stop and pause for a moment to consider the above list, it is truly hard to conceive how they could possibly have made all these decisions, and carried them out, whilst all sitting down together for dinner in a public place at about 8.30pm until 10pm as if nothing had happened.

But we suggest that instead of having four hours to plan an abduction hoax, they actually had four days. That’s 24 times as much time to think, plan and carry out a hoax abduction. Now let’s examine why we say she died on the Sunday. . 

continued:>

4. What indications do we have about when she died?

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 died on Sunday 29 April:

A.  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.

B. 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 - for a start two different people claim to have taken that photograph and on two different days. To sum up, there is no photographic evidence that Madeleine was alive after Sunday lunchtime (apart from the Make-Up photo - see below).

C.  Severe doubts about the evidence given by the McCanns and two Mark Warner creche nannies, Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington, regarding a ‘high tea’ which Madeleine is said to have attended between 4.45pm and 6pm 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.

D.  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 Madeleine 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 posted on 28 September 2015, 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?

E.  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 by Kate McCann’s own account of the events of that week, in her book, ‘Madeleine’, 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.

F.  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. In addition, there are also many contradictions in the statements of Catriona Baker and other creche nannies. There is, further, evidence that Catriona Baker was already known to the McCanns. Chloe Corner, daughter of Jon Corner; Madeleine’s godfather, had been a Facebook friend of Catriona Baker well before 2007. Catriona Baker also had a holiday at the McCanns’ home a few months after Madeleine was reported missing, suggesting a close relationship between them..

G.  Clear evidence that the McCanns’ pattern of behaviour changed after Sunday in the following ways:

1. Taking breakfast every day after Sunday in their own apartment and not with their friends in the restaurant

2. Similarly, taking lunch in their own apartment every day after Sunday and not with their friends on the Payne's balcony.

3. Never being seen out together with the twins from Monday onwards

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

5. Keeping the shutters, windows and curtains in the childrens’ bedroom shut all week, allegedly ‘to keep the heat out’ – even though the room was not used during the day and was actually chilly at night-time. The explanation for this conduct is inexplicable unless, for example, the room was empty and being cleaned.

H.  Doubtful or contradictory stories about what they did with Madeleine after Sunday, for example:

(i)  claiming to have gone on a trip to the beach with the children one day - despite the creche records saying the children were in their creches at the time and promoting stories about things that she had allegedly said or done

(ii)  contradictory stories about an alleged incident of the children crying at night-time: on Thursday: (a) it was the twins (b) it was Madeleine (c) it was Madeleine and Sean and (d) it was Amelie on the Wednesday not the Thursday

(iii) contradictory stories about which of them read the children a story on the Thursday evening.

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

I.  The problem with the ‘Tennis Balls Photo’

J.  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. As we saw above, two different people say they took the photo, and they disagreed about which day it was taken on. 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 at least one occasion, Rebelo suggested that he had ‘firm evidence’ that the McCanns and their friends had not been leaving their children and checking on them regularly each night as claimed, but that, instead their children were all being cared for in one of the friends’ apartments each night. Perhaps even more significantly, he said that there were seven children being cared for that way each night. The McCanns and their friends had eight children with them on that holiday. Why did he say seven children, and not eight? 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 stated to be ill.

K.  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 (3 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, and then photograph them. 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, and of other similar pyjamas, published after she was reported missing. He demonstrates that 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’ article: http://onlyinamericablogging.blogspot.com/2016/03/a-nightwear-job-by-dr-martin-roberts.html

[size=18]5.  Specific indications that Madeleine died on Sunday 29 April [/size]

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

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

B.  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. If that analysis is correct, this shows evidence of cunning planning and deception, amounting to perverting the course of justice.

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

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

D.  The involvement of Robert Murat

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

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

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

3.  He was on an extended stay in England (Devon) when the McCanns went on holiday to Praia da Luz in 2007

4.  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

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

6.  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, and discovered that the account he had earlier given of his movements was false, 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?

7.  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, and was co-operating with them in some way

8.  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, complaining about his conduct. Shortly afterwards, he was 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

E. 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 pink hair bead on her. When the film was published, 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 pink 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 very sad. We think there are good grounds for suspecting that the two photos may have been taken on the same day, and that Madeleine’s very sad appearance could be connected in some way to her having died later that same day.

[size=18]6.  Evidence that an abduction hoax was planned over a period of four days [/size]

It follows from all that we have said above that, if Madeleine did indeed die on Sunday 29 April, those who knew she had died must have carefully planned an audacious hoax over a period of four days, 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:

A.  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 he 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 out 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 incidentally paid the amazing sum of £500,000 to Bell Pottinger to keep Madeleine’s name on the front pages of Britain’s newspapers for a year. That money appears to have come from donations made by the general public.

B.  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 a 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 previously, a man was taking photographs of children on a beach had tried to kidnap his child at a tiny village called Sagres. He also 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 Tanner’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. As a result, Goncalo Amaral’s team wasted valuable time on only the second full day of their investigation contacting the German and Polish police and INTERPOL. They even got the German police to search the plane for Madeleine at Berlin Airport. It was a wild goose chase.

C.  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?

D.  The strange booking on Sunday night of the Tapas restaurant for the evening meal of the McCanns and the 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 and 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 still 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 the McCanns 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. After Madeleine was reported missing, the McCanns were able to claim that they had been eating at the Tapas restaurant each night, but were checking their children every half-hour. But this Tapas restaurant booking represented a change of plan. They has eaten in the Millennium Restaurant on the Saturday evening. What was the real reason for the change of plan?

E.  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 on Thursday? (as indeed they did so claim). If so, they would need to demonstrate that the shutters were previously in good working order.

F.  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 contacting them in the early hours of the morning and getting headline news about Madeleine’s disappearance onto the early Friday morning bulletins.

It was very early - Madeleine might very well have been found alive and well later that Friday - but on that very day, many media editors immediately despatched reporters to Praia da Luz. 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, Spain, he managed to reach Praia da Luz. Portugal. 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

Here we set out, briefly, some key objections to our theory - and provide our responses:

A.  “Nobody could keep up the pretence that their daughter had been abducted - knowing that she was dead - for so long (nine years now)

ANSWER: It has happened many times before in many other similar cases.

B.  “This hoax couldn’t be true; there would just be too many people who would know that Madeleine had died on Sunday. By now, if she had really died, someone would have broken ranks and revealed the truth”

ANSWER: 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 Saville was a serial paedophile. But they all kept silent. It was not public knowledge, until earlier this year, that Sir 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. But many people did know about Freud’s conduct – and likewise kept it secret for decades. Besides that, when journalists tried to question the McCanns’ close friend David Payne about the events of their holiday in Praia da Luz that week, he refused to talk, saying: “We have a pact of silence”. In the very early weeks after Madeleine was reported missing, John Stalker, an experienced and respected detective chosen to work on the alleged ‘Shoot to Kill’ policy in Northern Ireland, stated that in his opinion: “My gut instinct is that some big secret is being covered up”.

C.  “There are too just many sightings of Madeleine all week; all those people can’t be mistaken”

ANSWER: Look at the analysis of these sightings by HideHo that we referred to above. None of them stand up to serious scrutiny.

D.  “Mrs Pamela Fenn, a widow who lived above the McCanns, heard Madeleine crying between 10.30pm and 11.45pm on Tuesday night

ANSWER: 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, Edna Glyn, while the crying was going on, but neither of them did anything about it. Later, Robert Murat claimed that Mrs Fenn had ’phoned him, not Mrs Glyn, about the alleged crying. Mrs Fenn’s 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 multiple evidence, beyond what we’ve said here, that her statement was fabricated.

Madeleine McCann Research Group, August 2016

Today we bring you a selection of articles also pointing towards Madeleine having died earlier in the week.

1. Planning the abduction Hoax - was it done over one or four days?

2. Madeleine McCann could not have died from an accident, nor from anything else on Thursday May 3rd 2007

3. The seven photos that provide the biggest clue to when Madeleine died

4. Was Madeleine seen after Sunday?

PLANNING THE ABDUCTION HOAX. WAS IT DONE OVER FOUR DAYS, OR FOUR HOURS?

by the Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG)

7 November 2017

The theory of Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida, as expressed in his Interim Report of 10 September, was that Madeleine died in her parents’ apartment, sometime after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May. It was repeated by Dr Goncalo Amaral in his book: ‘The Truth About A Lie’. Both made their judgment on the basis of one fact which they said was ‘proven’, namely that Madeleine had had a ‘high tea’ with the McCanns, and child nannies Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington.

This conclusion is still supported by some notable names who have expressed views on the case over many years: U.S. Criminal Profiler Pat Brown, and bloggers Textusa and Isabelle McFadden for example. And many continue to agree with them.

But two pieces of work, both highlighted on CMOMM, have undermined that theory. One was the brilliant work done by ‘PeterMac’ and others on CMOMM which demonstrated overwhelmingly that the ‘Last Photo’ was taken on Sunday lunchtime, 29 April, and NOT, as claimed, on 3 May. The other was the equally painstaking work of Lizzy Taylor (‘HideHo’), who suggested three years ago on CMOMM that there was no credible evidence that Madeleine was seen by anyone after Sunday 30 April. The only evidence that she was alive for the rest of that week came from the McCanns, their friends and Cat Baker - plus assorted Ocean Club staff whose testimony was vague in the extreme and not in accord with the known facts.

These pieces of work have been greatly reinforced by Richard Hall’s stunning five Madeleine McCann documentaries, and by Dr Martin Roberts, who proved that Madeleine’s actual pyjamas were photographed well before the cry of ‘Abduction!’ was raised – and then used in press conferences, on 5 and 7 June 2017.

----------

There are those who still insist that Madeleine could have died and been killed in the four hours or so after the alleged ‘high tea’ on Thursday. These individuals criticise the hypotheses of researchers like PeterMac, Lizzy Taylor and Richard Hall, some even calling their theories ‘lunacy’. Yet these armchair critics never make any detailed criticisms of the facts and arguments presented by them. It’s a remarkable fact that there has never been an adequate response anywhere to the weight of evidence advanced by ‘PeterMac’, Lizzy, Richard and Martin.

The purpose of this article is to get people thinking again about which theory makes most sense:

1. That Madeleine’s death, and the planning and execution of the abduction hoax was carried out in the four hours immediately before 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May, or
   
2. That Madeleine died on Sunday or Monday and the abduction hoax was planned over three to four days.
   

Below we set out a list of at least EIGHTEEN elements of the abduction hoax that had to be in place before Thursday evening:

A Faked abduction scene in the children’s bedroom

B Nuno Lourence told to lie about Krokowski

C Jane Tanner also given a description of Krokowski

D A plausible cover story to explain how Madeleine could have been left alone (the half-hourly checking regime)

E A detailed regime of checking on the Thursday evening

F Someone looking after all the children on that Thursday evening

G The lie about David Payne visiting Kate McCann rehearsed (though obviously not very well)

H Cat Baker briefed to lie about the ‘high tea’ (probably Charlotte Pennington was briefed to lie about this on a subsequent occasion)

I Cover story for what Gerry was actually doing on the Thursday afternoon (endless tennis lessons)

J Photo taken on Sunday by the pool, just before she died, chosen to be altered, so the date and time stamp to read so it looked like it was taken on Thursday

K Tennis Balls Photo faked (not sure how yet) and Kate rehearsed about when it was taken (again not very well)

L Shutters repaired that week (so that they could fake a break-in later in the week?)

M ‘Deep clean’ of the blood and DNA that week (Monday?)

N Holidaymakers lined up to tell lies about seeing Madeleine that week (Philip Edmonds and the photo, Vicky Boyd’s lies about the Wednesday in First Magazine)

O Key media people briefed?

P Old 6” x 4” pics of Maddie ready and prepared

Q Timelines prepared and scribbled out

R Murat ready to be appointed one of the PJ translators

========================

In addition, here are 29 questions which we all must ask about when Madeleine died, and how the abduction was planned:

1 When was Murat asked to come over to Praia da Luz?

2 By whom was he asked?

3 Why was he asked? (If the McCanns had been negligent in staying out too late, and Madeleine fell and died as suggested, why would Murat be needed at all? And moreover, why would there be that prodigious effort to rush over to Praia da Luz by literally dozens of Foreign Office staff, Ambassadors, Consuls and their staff, police officers, lawyers, MI5, security service staff, criminal profilers, advisers, counsellors, Control Risks etc.? Something much more serious must be behind her death)

4 What was Murat REALLY doing on the Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday, when he lied at least 17 times about his movements on those days

5 Did he already know the McCanns? Since when had he known them?

6 Why were hairs of his haplotype found in Wojchiech Krokowski’s holiday apartment?

7 How do we account for the crèche records showing that Madeleine was at the crèche all week?

8 Did Cat Baker agree to forge the records that week?

9 Who else at the Ocean Club/Mark Warner knew that she was forging those records? (if she was)
++++

10 What is the role of Wojchiech Krokowski in all of this?

11 What is the role of Nuno Lourenco in all this?

12 When was Nuno Lourenco told to ‘frame’ Krokowski?

13 When were Nuno Lourenco and Jane Tanner both briefed to come up with the same description of an abductor? (based on Krokowski) – ‘not a tourist’, ‘cloth clothes’, ‘classic shoes, same height, build and age etc. etc.

14 Who co-ordinated and planned the Nourenco/Krokowski deception?

15 When did Nuno Lourenco take a photo of Krokowski’s car on his mobile ‘phone?

16 Was Krokowski a ‘willing patsy’? – or did he really have no idea he was being famed?

17 Why were hairs of the same haplotype as Jane Tanner found in Krokowski’s holiday flat.

18 Was Krokowski a paedophile? Why did he readily admit to The People in 2015 that he liked taking pictures of children on holiday?

++++

19 What really happened on the Sunday?

20 Was the Make-Up Photo taken on Sunday 29 April?

21 Was Madeleine already being ‘dressed up’ on Sunday lunchtime? (pink smock, hair beads)

22 Where was Madeleine that Sunday afternoon? Was she really in the crèche that day?

23 Where was the Make-Up Photo taken?

24 Why the sudden rush to book a table every night at the Tapas restaurant?

25 Was it because they needed a private room to discuss what had happened to Madeleine?

26 Why the immediate change of routine on the Monday morning: breakfast and lunch in their own apartment instead of at the Millennium

27 On Sunday evening, did they all ‘dine out’, whether or not there was a ‘checking regime’ in place? (I think not)

28 After Sunday, did they ever have a ‘checking regime’ in place? (I think not, but there was what we might call a ‘checking charade’ on the Thursday night)

++++

29 When and where did the McCanns, the Tapas 7 and any other ‘advisers’ meet to plot the abduction hoax on the Thursday night?

Madeleine McCann could not have died from an accident, nor from anything else, after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007

In July 2008, the Portuguese police and its judiciary, in the person of the regional Attorney-General, issued reports in which they said there was insufficient evidence for charging any one individual or individuals with responsibility for the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

Two possible hypotheses were ‘archived’, or, as it were, left on the shelf, awaiting what they said would need to be ‘new and credible evidence’ sufficient to justify re-opening their investigation.

These were: (1) Madeleine had been abducted by a person or persons as yet unknown, or (2) Madeleine had died in the McCanns’ apartment and her body had been hidden.

The contrary view: she died in an accident after 5.30pm on 3 May

A different view from that of the Portuguese judicial authorities was set out by the investigation co-ordinator, Dr Goncalo Amaral, on 22 July 2008, in a book, ‘The Truth of the Lie’, and by one of his senior investigators, Detective Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida, in an interim report dated 10 September 2007. 

Tavares de Almeida’s view

This was how Tavares de Almeida expressed the investigation’s preliminary conclusion – I just reproduce his first six points: 

“From everything that we have discovered, our files result in the following conclusions:
  
1 the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007

2 simulation - a staged hoax - of an abduction took place

3 in order to render the child’s death impossible before 10.00pm, a situation of checking of the McCann couple’s children while they slept was concocted

4 Dr Gerald McCann and Dr Kate McCann are involved in the concealment of the corpse of their daughter, Madeleine McCann

5 at this moment, there seems to be no strong indications yet that the child’s death was other than the result of a tragic accident

6 from what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, did not want to deliver up Madeleine’s corpse immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility therefore that it was moved from the initial place where she died. This situation may raise questions concerning the circumstances in which the death of the child took place.

These are the relevant extracts from Goncalo Amaral’s book (AnnaEsse’s translation):

“MADELEINE'S HOLIDAY

“On the fateful day of May 3rd, the attendance register at the play centre indicates that Madeleine arrived at 9.10, accompanied by her father. Her mother came to fetch her at 12.25 for lunch and took her back at 2 o'clock. After jogging on the beach and going to fetch the twins, she collected Maddie at 5.30pm. From that moment on, no other person saw the little girl, apart from her parents and their friends. What happened then in the apartment remains a mystery.

“THE INTERROGATIONS

“We finally decide to question her as a witness, but not to pose questions on the events after 5.30pm, the time at which she returned to the apartment with her three children.

“A DISAPPEARANCE, A WINDOW AND A BODY

"It is now important to present a summary of this case, based on our deductions: reject what is false, throw out what we can't show with sufficient certainty and validate that which can be proven.

“Point 5. The body, the existence of which has been confirmed by the EVRD and CSI dogs but also by the results of the preliminary laboratory analyses, cannot be found.
“The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:
“1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;
“3. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.
“4. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident…” 

----------------------------------------------- 

I will refer to the theory that Madeleine died from an accident (or worse) after 5.30pm on 3 May as ‘The PJ Theory’.

If Madeleine died after 5.30pm on 3 May, what would the McCanns have had to do?

First of all, what is known for sure about the period between 5.30pm and 10.00pm?

Do we know for sure that Madeleine was with her family in her apartment at 5.30pm?

Well, that depends on whether or not you accept as gospel the claims of Gerry and Kate McCann, Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington that Madeleine was at a high tea in the Tapas restaurant from (according to Gerry McCann) 4.45pm onwards to somewhere between 5.30pm and 6.00pm.

But for the purposes of this article, I shall assume that she was.

Then we have the McCanns and their friends dining at the Tapas restaurant. There is agreement from the McCanns, their friends, other holidaymakers and Ocean Club staff that they were all settled at their table at around 8.30pm to 8.45pm.

So, if she had died, as suggested by both Goncalo Amaral and Tavares de Almeida, what would the McCanns have had to do between, say, 5.30pm and 10.00pm?

Or more pertinently, between when they arrived back at their apartment (5.30pm to 6.00pm) and sat down in the restaurant for dinner and drinks at 8.30pm to 8.45pm. A period of about three hours.  

A preliminary point to raise is: were the twins present when, according to the PJ theory, Madeleine died? It seems unlikely. But according to the PJ theory, she must have been.

So I suggest that all these things must all happened during these three hours:

1 (If the twins were there) The McCanns would have had to make swift arrangements to move them out of the way whilst they decided what to do. That would take some time and probably they would have had to take them to one of their friends’ apartments.

2 They would first have to decide if Madeleine really was dead or could be revived or resuscitated. This may or may not have taken some time to decide.

3 There would then have to be a rapid decision-making process during which all the following decisions would have to be taken:

A Do we take her to hospital?

B If so, what are the risks?

C Can we pass this off as a genuine accident?

D Is there any other reason why we dare not risk going to hospital and possibly facing a post-mortem?

E Would we be investigated by the police?

Then (assuming that they then decided that they are not going to inform the authorities of Madeleine’s death) there are more decisions to be made about what to do with Madeleine’s body:

F Hide it straightaway?

G If so, where?

H Or ’phone a trusted friend first and ask for advice?

I Where can we get a car quickly so as to hide it?

J Have we got anything we can carry her body out in, without anybody thinking there might be a body in it?

K Can we get all this done before 8.30pm, when we’re supposed to meet our friends for dinner?

Maybe other related questions.

Then there’s another very tricky question to answer:

L Who do we tell about this?

M Just David and Fiona?

N Just Russell and Jane?

O All four of them?

P Matt and Rachael as well?

Q What can we say to the staff, to our other friends we’ve met on holiday?

R How are we going to explain this away?

They then will have to consider these questions:

S What is our excuse for not having Madeleine anymore?   

T We could say that Madeleine must have wandered off somewhere

U We could say that we took her down to the beach and she got swept out to sea

V Maybe other ideas were discussed

W Or could we get away with faking an abduction

Let us presume at this point that they decided to tell all their friends: Dave, Fiona, Russell, Jane, Matt, Rachael (I assume at this point that those who say that Madeleine died after 5.30pm fully accept that the McCanns must have let all their Tapas 9 friends know what had happened to Madeleine - and that they all agreed on a plan - though I am aware that some still maintain that maybe, in this scenario, the McCanns didn’t say anything to any of their friends, none of whom therefore knew that Madeleine was dead).  

In such a scenario, the McCanns would probably contact their friends on their mobiles. Or quickly nip round and knock on their doors.

Could they have discussed this desperate situation bilaterally? Surely not. They would have to have a meeting about it – at the very time they were all getting the children ready for bed and beginning to dress up for dinner.

In such a scenario, how likely is it that all six friends would have agreed within, say, 5-10 minutes that they would all play their roles in a fake abduction?

I suggest that it is unlikely in the extreme.  

Even had they all rapidly agreed to go along with an abduction hoax later that evening at 10.00pm, there would be all manner of questions and suggestions.

We also need to bear in mind that on the basis of the PJ theory as it stands, this was a holiday to a place the McCanns had never been to before. They knew no-one in the area who could help them. They had no immediate access to a car, and so on. Madeleine had been happily playing with her brother and sister, her friends in the Lobsters club, and her Mum and Dad for six days.

So the McCanns and their friends would be rapidly tossing these sorts of ideas around:

X Where are going to hide the body?

Y What about down the beach?

Z In the sea, using a boat?

AA In a derelict house in Praia da Luz?

BB Get hold of a car and drive the body somewhere well away from Praia da Luz.  

Then, again assuming that they had all agreed to a plan of action, there would be loads more questions about (a) the apartment and (b) how to execute the hoax.

CC The apartment. If there had been a bad accident, or something equally bad had happened, who would clean the room?

DD How would it be done?         

EE Was there any blood to clear away? 

Then there would be questions about how the abduction hoax was going to be performed.

FF Who will raise the alarm?

GG What shall we all do after we raise the alarm? – Do we go frantically pretending to look for her?

HH Or do we ring the police?

II Do we inform the Ocean Club?

JJ When shall we do all this?

KK Do we need someone to pretend to see an abductor?

LL Who will do it? Jane perhaps?

MM What time shall we get her to say she saw someone?

NN Where shall we positon the abductor?

OO What about a description? She needs to have a believable description to give to the police.    

Then we come to them all sitting down for dinner at 8.30pm to 8.45pm.  Do those who suggest Madeleine had died after 5.30pm believe that all nine of the Tapas 9 could have, with every appearance of calm, nonchalantly sat down for dinner that night as though nothing had happened? With the body already hidden by that time? – somewhere where no-one could find it? The room cleaned of any blood? The abduction hoax ready scripted and ready to carry out?

Could they chat away merrily to the Carpenter family and ther children, for example, knowing that their first-born daughter had suddenly died within the past three hours?

I suggest it is unlikely in the extreme.

Some suggest that maybe the body wasn’t hidden before 8.30pm, but lay there while they were eating, with someone - presumably Gerry McCann - carrying his dead daughter to a temporary or final resting place somewhere after that.

Some of course suggest that Gerry McCann went back to the apartment during the meal, picked up his dead daughter clad in her pyjamas, and carried for about half a mile or more through the streets of Praia da Luz, being seen at 10.00pm by the Smiths, who negligently failed to do anything about their extraordinary sighting for 13 days afterwards. We have discussed the likelihood of that scenario on CMOMM. The theory would require Gerry McCann to have made an extremely risky, not to say crass, decision to walk for some 15 or 20 minutes across the village at the very moment that his wife and/or others was raising the alarm.    

So finally I ask: is the PJ theory that Madeleine died after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May credible?

I ask this not to undermine the work of Goncalo Amaral and the PJ, who, after all, only had four months’ worth of evidence to consider before they wrote their interim report.

I ask this not to attack any of those, including some well-known names amongst established Madeleine McCann researchers, who defend this theory and have stuck by it.

I raise these questions only to tease out whether the PJ theory is a reasonable hypothesis that can be built on and developed…

…or whether it is now time to completely abandon it.           

-----------------


For discussion, please visit this thread: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13044-madeleine-mccann-could-not-have-died-from-an-accident-nor-from-anything-else-after-5-30pm-on-thursday-3-may-2007

The seven photos that provide the biggest clue to when Madeleine died

Seemingly produced out of the blue, this year (2019) saw one more photo of Madeleine in Praia da Luz.

It showed Madeleine playing on the morning of Sunday 29 April, as a group of children were blowing up a giant balloon. The group of children was from the Lobsters group of seven children, the group in which Madeleine was placed, and led by creche nanny Catriona Baker:



This photo was produced for the 8-part Netflix documentary on Madeleine McCann. It was clearly taken on Sunday 29 April, but Netflix did not inform viewers of who took it. It shows Madeleine at a 'giant balloon' play event, about 11am that morning

In effect, the new photo adds nothing new to what we know about Madeleine McCann on holiday that week. What we CAN say about it, is that it does not in any way contradict the hypothesis of the Madeleine McCann Research group that Madeleine died later that very same day (Sunday 29 April). 

But it does tend to confirm the MMRG's case that the 'Last Photo' of Madeleine by the swimming pool weas taken on Sunday 29 April and NOT, as the McCanns claimed, on Thursday 3 May 2007.

We can see immediately that this new photo was taken in bright sunlight. That agrees with the 'giant balloon' session for the Lobsters session being taken on the morning of Sunday 29 April.

Like the controversial 'Last Photo', which we know was probably taken at about 2.29pm, it was clearly taken on a bright, sunny day.

THE ONLY SUNNY DAY that week was Sunday, 29 April.

During Sunday night, a cold front passed over the area, bringing - for the next four days - cloudy, windy, colder weather, along with some rain. Warmer, sunnier weather did not return until late on Thursday 3 May.

Thus, to complete the picture, these are the SEVEN photos we are interested in: 


Photo 1: SATURDAY: Madeleine playing with her father in the Ocean Club playground
Photos 2 & 3: SATURDAY:  Madeleine playing near the Wendy House in the Ocean Club playground
Photo 4: SUNDAY (New): Madeleine at the 'giant balloon' play session with her creche group, Lobsters, on Sunday morning, probably around 11am
Photo 5: SUNDAY: The controversial 'Last Photo', which the McCanns say was taken Thursday, but which we can deduce to have been taken on the Sunday, from the weather conditions
Photo 6: SUNDAY: The controversial 'Make-Up Photo', which contains several indications that it was taken on Sunday afternoon that week, apparently at a location elsewhere in Praia da Luz. or nearby, and finally...

Photo 7: THE TENNIS BALLS PHOTO, which is CLAIMED to have been taken that week, but was also claimed to have been taken on three different days by at least two different people. It is NOT possible to state that this photo was definitely taken that week, and there is some evidence that it may be a photoshopped compromise.

For further information on this please see the excellent two research articles by 'Petermac' in his e-book, which can be found on CMOMM by searching for 'Petermac'.


CONCLUSION:  We now have THREE photos of Madeleine which we can definitely date to Saturday, and THREE which we may with reasonable certainty all date to Sunday.

But we have NO certain photos of Madeleine after Sunday.

So this new photo of Madeleine at the 'giant balloon' session tends to fully confirm MMRG's hypothesis that Madeleine probably died late on Sunday  
    
- update by MMRG, 7 August 2019 


=====================================================================================


  








        


 


THE SIX PHOTOS THAT PROVIDE THE BIGGEST CLUE TO WHEN MADELEINE DIED

by the Madeleine McCann Research Group, Christmas 2017

Here are the only six photos of Madeleine McCann which have been, or thought to have been, taken of her during the McCanns ‘ill-fated' holiday to Portugal in April/May 2007:


Madeleine playing in the Ocean Club playground on Saturday 28 April


Another pic of Madeleine playing in the Ocean Club playground on Saturday 28 April


A third pic of Madeleine playing in the Ocean Club playground on Saturday 28 April


A pic of Gerry McCann, Madeleine and Amelie taken by the Ocean Club pool, claimed by the McCanns to have been taken on Thursday 3 May at lunchtime but which various lines of evidence suggest must have been taken on Sunday 29 April at lunchtime


Madeleine in Make-Up. The McCanns have been vague about when and under what circumstances this photo was taken. There are indications (a) that it was taken in Praia da Luz on that holiday and (b) that, if it was, it was also taken on Sunday 29 April, probably sometime after lunch


The Tennis Balls Photo. This has been claimed to have been taken by at least two different people on at least two different days. A careful analysis of the description given by Kate McCann of how the photo came to be taken seems improbable. It therefore cannot be assumed to be a genuine photo of Madeleine taken on that holiday.


================================================================


In short we have four or five photos probably taken on Saturday and Sunday, but no confirmed photos of her after that.

This is despite the family’s large collection of photos and videos and the fact that they had a digital camera on holiday.

Our conclusion therefore from these six photos is that they tell a simple story; namely that there is no photographic proof of Madeleine being alive after Sunday.

Elsewhere we and others have given detailed reasons for this conclusion.

We are struck by the complete failure so far by anyone who still supports the claim that Madeleine died after 6pm on Thursday to bring forward any credible argument as to why we have no proven photos of Madeleine on any of the four days from Monday to Thursday.

We seek the opinions of CMOMM forum members and guests as to whether our conclusion is reasonable – or, if it is not, why it is not.

MMRG
--------------

For discussion, please visit this thread: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14797-the-six-photos-that-provide-the-biggest-clue-to-when-madeleine-died

Lizzy Hideho Taylor
to
‎HiDeHo CONTROVERSY of Madeleine McCann
23 hrs ·



I CHALLENGE anyone to find a statement that could be considered PROOF that Madeleine was alive during the week... Was Madeleine seen after SUNDAY?

I did not come to the conclusion that something may have happened to her earlier in the week on a whim... I discovered some MAJOR discrepancies started happening on Tuesday and researched all the statements to try to pinpoint the day she was last seen... SUNDAY LUNCHTIME!

I have TWO VERY LONG threads collating some of the research. I don't 'guess' I worked hard to try to find ANYTHING that I considered proof... In 6 years or more, I have NEVER found anything...

Note: It doesn't mean she wasn't seen, but there is nothing to prove she was!

1) Title: People that saw Madeleine during the holiday
http://forum4.aimoo.com/madeleinemccanncontroversy/WELCOME-to-HDH-Controversy-Info/People-that-saw-Madeleine-during-the-holiday-1-2344234.html

2) Title: Did ANYONE see Madeleine during the holiday?
http://forum4.aimoo.com/madeleinemccanncontroversy/category/Did-ANYONE-see-Madeleine-during-the-holiday-1-2344239.html

https://www.facebook.com/groups/HiDeHoCONTROVERSYofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/527143374108823/

Today we bring you a letter that was sent by the Madeleine McCann Research Group to the Attorney-General of Portugal who then forwarded the the evidence to the Policia Judiciara in Faro, Portugal.

A LETTER TO DRª JOANA MARQUES VIDAL, CHIEF PROSECUTOR, PORTUGAL, 28 FEBRUARY 2018, FROM MMRG

Introduction by forum owner, Jill Havern.

On 28 February 2018, members of the Madeleine McCann Research Group posted, by Special Delivery, a letter to the Chief Prosecutor of Portugal, Drª Joana Marques Vidal.

I’m now publishing the letter, in both its English and Portuguese versions. We are grateful to Portuguese journalist Paulo Reis for the translation of this 8,500-word letter, and to one of our long-time supporters who paid the translation fee. I would just like to add that Paulo offered to do the translation for free, but was persuaded by our generous friend to accept a fee at standard translation rates.

The letter was written by members of the Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG).

The lines of enquiry advanced by MMRG in the letter have emerged in large part from the long-term efforts of members of CMOMM. There are a number of Madeleine McCann discussion forums. Ours has been a discussion-forum plus. By that, I mean it is discussion + focussed research. Literally hundreds of CMOMM members have, over the years, contributed to the hypothesis laid out by MMRG in its letter. I thank every one of you so much for your time, effort and input.


As is well known, the Admin & Moderation team here are also of the opinion that many lines of evidence point to Madeleine having died three or four days before the McCanns raised the alarm on Thursday 3 May.

The Portuguese Police are responsible for any further investigation into Madeleine’s reported disappearance and that is why MMRG have sent the letter to the Chief Portuguese Prosecutor, Drª Joana Marques Vidal. It is the view of the overwhelming majority of CMOMM members that the Scotland Yard investigation is a charade and a cover-up of what actually happened to Madeleine, just as Gonçalo Amaral alleged. While MMRG do not think Scotland Yard will act on the letter, MMRG will shortly send it to them, if only to prove - hopefully one day soon – that the Metropolitan Police has acted thoroughly dishonestly in pretending to conduct a genuine investigation.

In signing off, I must on behalf of myself and CMOMM say a huge ‘thank you’ to others who have helped us here and MMRG to get where we are today. I must make mention of those who have kept great libraries of information for us to use, such as pamalam, Nigel Moore’s mccannfiles, and Maddie Case Files.

I want to pay tribute to Gonçalo Amaral and his original team of detectives, who did so much – against an impossible background of intolerable international media pressure, gross interference in his investigation by the British security services, and lies and outright fabrications by many of their witnesses. Portugal can be justly proud of them.

Finally, I must - regrettably - end with a note of disgust. Just before MMRG sent their letter, I heard that the McCanns had not yet paid one penny of the court costs that were awarded against them by the Portuguese Supreme Court in January 2017. For nine years, the McCanns crusaded against Gonçalo Amaral in the courts, pushing him to one hearing after another, using money provided by the British public, supposed to be for finding Madeleine, and no doubt money from certain ‘other’ sources. Kate McCann said she wanted him to ‘feel pain’. Well, they succeeded in doing that all right.

But after nine years fighting him, they LOST. And, fourteen months later, they have not yet had the decency to pay him what the court ordered.

Utterly shameful.

-----------------



From: The Madeleine McCann Research Group
(Address redacted)        

Tel:    + 44 7xxxxxxxxx                                                                
                                                                                                       

28 February 2018      

To:

Exma Sra. Procuradora-Geral da República,
Drª Joana Marques Vidal
Rua da Escola Politécnica, 140
1269-269 LISBOA
PT   P O R T U G A L


Dear Drª Joana Marques Vidal


re: The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: New evidence of what happened to her

We are a group of mainly British researchers. Most of us have studied the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in depth for the past 10 years. Our members and researchers include many people with professional expertise, such as ex-police officers, lawyers, photographers, computer experts and statement analysts.

On 10 September 2007, Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida, on behalf of the Policia Judiciara, produced an interim (‘intercalary’) report summarising the police’s case against Madeleine’s parents, Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann (6):

A   The conclusions in Tavares de Almeida’s report

This is an English translation of the conclusions reached by the PJ’s investigation up to and including 10 September 2007:

QUOTE

From everything that we have discovered, our files result in the following conclusions:

A  the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007

B  a simulation - a staged hoax - of an abduction took place

C  in order to render the child’s death impossible before 10.00pm, a situation of checking of the McCann couple’s children while they slept was concocted

D  Dr Gerald McCann and Dr Kate McCann are involved in the concealment of the corpse of their daughter, Madeleine McCann

E  at this moment, there seems to be no strong indications that the child’s death was other than the result of a tragic accident, yet;

F   from what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, did not want to deliver up Madeleine’s corpse immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility therefore that it was moved from the initial place where she died. This situation may raise questions concerning the circumstances in which the death of the child took place.

G  Therefore, we suggest that the case files are sent to the Republic’s Prosecutor, in the Lagos legal district, for:

1   possible new questioning of the arguidos Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann, and

2   an evaluation of the measure of restraint to be applied in this case.

During the house search at the McCann couple’s residence, a diary style manuscript was found, already photocopied, possibly authored by Dr Kate McCann; admitting that it may contain information that may help to reach the material truth of facts.

We therefore propose that the photocopies of the said document are presented to the illustrious judge for the purpose of its apprehension (if legal), its translation and eventual collection of information to be included in the files, as necessary for the investigation.

At this date, I submit the case files for your appreciation, for you to determine whatever you may see as convenient.

10 September 2007                              Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida

UNQUOTE


The research that we have undertaken – and that of many others both here, in Portugal, and elsewhere – leads us to support all of the above conclusions in Tavares de Almeida’s report – except for one.  

We noted that when the report of the Policia Judiciara was archived in July 2007, it was said that the case would be re-opened if ‘new and credible evidence’ was received by the Portuguese authorities.  The case was re-opened in the PJ’s Oporto office in 2013. Our letter contains evidence which we believe they should see and act on.

As a result of painstaking research by many people, we believe that we are now in a position to supply you with new and credible evidence on one matter (the date of death) covered in the first point of Tavares de Almeida’s report, namely: “Conclusion  A. the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007”.

We are satisfied that we can now provide sufficient evidence to show that the minor Madeleine McCann died not on the night of Thursday 3rd May, but instead died between Sunday afternoon (29th April) and Monday afternoon (30th April).

The remainder of this letter sets out in brief summary the evidence which we suggest points clearly to Madeleine having died on the Sunday or Monday that week. We will present the evidence under these seven headings:  

A  A large number of false statements were made at the outset, containing a huge amount of fabricated evidence. These added credibility to the McCanns’ claim that Madeleine had been abducted on Thursday 3 May. They diverted the PJ investigation into believing that Madeleine was still alive that day.

B  The photograph of Madeleine McCann, Dr Gerry McCann and Amelie, taken by the Ocean Club pool.

C  The absence of photographs of Madeleine taken after Sunday. (7)

D  The fabricated statement of Nuno Lourenco, who tried to identify Wojchiech Krokowski as a potential child-kidnapper who had tried to abduct his daughter on Sagres beach. (3) (8) (9) (10) (11)

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, at about 5pm to 6pm on Thursday 3 May. (12)

F The lack of any credible, independent evidence by anybody that Madeleine McCann was seen alive after Sunday 29th April.  (7) (13)

G  The mystery of the strange ‘Make-Up Photo’ of Madeleine, which appears to have been taken on Sunday 29th April, (5) (14) (15) and

H  Clear photographic evidence that the very 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 5th June 2007, the other in Amsterdam, Holland, on 7th June 2007. (16) (17)



In presenting our evidence, we wish to emphasise that we are in no way critical of the PJ investigation. On the contrary, we believe it was diligently and brilliantly pursued in almost impossible circumstances, namely the determination of the British government and media to insist that Madeleine had been abducted. It is our case that the abduction hoax was skillfully crafted over a period of four days, and was so designed as to deliberately mislead the PJ. Only after years of patiently unravelling the evidence and exposing the deceit has it been possible to arrive at our conclusion that Madeleine was probably dead 3 to 4 days before Thursday 3 May.

Before detailing our evidence on these points, we would like to make the following observations on the conclusions of Tavares de Almeida and of Dr Gonçalo Amaral in his book, A Verdada da Mentira, ‘The Truth of the Lie’. (18)

B.   The PJ’s evidence about the alleged ‘high tea’ with Madeleine and her parents on the afternoon of Thursday 3 May

In Tavares de Almeida’s report (6), he states the following about the events of the evening of Thursday 3 May:

QUOTE

“But there is another question about the timing which is this: The last time that the child was seen outside of the group, by someone who can prove they saw her, was at around 5.35pm, when the parents went to pick her up at the crèche.

“This may widen the time lapse between Madeleine’s ‘disappearance’ and the alarm being raised into more than four hours”.

UNQUOTE  

This is paralleled by two short passages in Gonçalo Amaral’s book ‘The Truth of the Lie’. Here is an English translation (by Anna Silvestro) of the relevant paragraphs (18):

QUOTE

(1st passage) “On the fateful day of May 3rd, the attendance register at the play centre indicates that Madeleine arrived at 9.10, accompanied by her father. Her mother came to fetch her at 12.25 for lunch and took her back at 2 o'clock. After jogging on the beach and going to fetch the twins, she collected Maddie at 5.30pm. From that moment on, no other person saw the little girl, apart from her parents and their friends. What happened then in the apartment remains a mystery”.

(2nd passage)   “THE INTERROGATIONS

“We finally decide to question [Kate McCann[ as a witness, but not to pose questions on the events after 5.30pm, the time at which she returned to the apartment with her three children.

A DISAPPEARANCE, A WINDOW AND A BODY

“It is now important to present a summary of this case, based on our deductions: reject what is false, throw out what we can't show with sufficient certainty and validate that which can be proven. Point 5. The body, the existence of which has been confirmed by the EVRD and CSI dogs, but also by the results of the preliminary laboratory analyses, cannot be found. The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:

1  The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;

2  Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.

3 The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident…”

UNQUOTE

We will present evidence that Madeleine was not present at that ‘high tea’, (4) (13) that the ‘high tea’ never happened, and that there is no credible, independent evidence that Madeleine was seen alive after lunchtime on Sunday 29th April. (4) (13)

C.   The two descriptions of an abductor by Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco

We will also make observations on another matter. That is the descriptions given of an abductor to the PJ by the McCanns’ friend, Jane Tanner, during Friday, 4th May, and a second description of a child kidnapper by Nuno Lourenco, early the following day (Saturday 5th November).    

This is what Tavares de Almeida says about the claims of Jane Tanner (6):

QUOTE

“Later, during the course of the morning of May 4th, the father gives the same brief description [as Jane Tanner did] and refers back to Jane for additional details. The latter [Jane tanner] appears at the offices of the Policia Judiciara in Portimão at 11.30am. This time, the description is very precise:  

the individual, aged between 35 and 40, was thin and 1.70m tall;

his hair was dark brown, falling over his collar;

he was wearing cream or beige trousers, probably linen,

a sort of anorak - but not very thick –

and black shoes, classic in style.

He was walking hurriedly, with a child in his arms. He was warmly dressed, the reason she thought he was not a tourist. The child appeared to be asleep - she only saw the legs - had bare feet and was dressed in pyjamas, which were obviously cotton, light-coloured, probably white or pale pink, with a pattern - flowers maybe, but she isn't certain. Concerning the man, she states that she would recognise him from the back by his particular way of walking. The importance of this statement will be seen later”.

UNQUOTE

Now we come to a description of a man given by Nuno Lourenco to the PJ on the morning of Saturday 5th May (8) (9) (10). He said this man tried to kidnap his daughter outside a café in the village of Sagres, on Sunday 30th April (8). As we now know from the PJ’s investigations during that Saturday, they identified the man as Wojchiech Krokowski, (9) (10) (18) a Polish man who was on holiday in Praia da Luz in the very same week that the McCanns were also staying there. This is what Gonçalo Amaral says in his book about Nuno Lourenco’s claims (18):

QUOTE

“From information from Sagres, we learn that an individual has been surprised on Mareta beach taking photos of several children and in particular of a little girl aged 4, blonde with blue eyes, who looks like Madeleine. It was the little girl's father who noticed him. This 40 year-old man, wearing glasses, tells the investigators that the photographer tried to kidnap his daughter in the afternoon of April 26th in Sagres.

“He allegedly then fled in a hired car with a woman in the passenger seat. The stranger did not look like a tourist; brown hair down to his collar, wearing cream-coloured trousers and jacket and shoes of a classic style. This report reminds us of the individual encountered by Jane Tanner in the streets of Vila da Luz on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance.

“Thanks to the father's composure, he managed to take a photograph of the vehicle. It's not very clear and does not allow us to make out the number plate, but we succeed, nonetheless, in finding the car. The car hire firm provides us with the identity of the driver. He is a forty-year-old Polish man, who is traveling with his wife. They arrived in Portugal on April 28th, from Berlin. At Faro airport, they hired a car and were put up in an apartment in Budens, near Praia da Luz. Unfortunately, on May 5th, at 7am, they had already left, taking with them their camera and all the photos from their holiday. We ask the German police, through Interpol, to monitor them as soon as they arrive in Berlin. All the passengers are questioned, but no one has seen a child looking like Madeleine. In Berlin, the couple take the train to return to Poland. Thus, the Polish trail comes to an end. We would like to have seen their photos...but that proved impossible”.


UNQUOTE

As can be clearly seen, Gonçalo Amaral and his team of PJ detectives clearly believed that the man seen by Nuno Lourenco at Sagres on Sunday 30th April was the same man that Jane Tanner had seen at around 9.15pm on Thursday 3rd May (19) (20)near the McCanns’ apartment. All the following descriptions were identical:


age of the man (35-40, or 40)

hair brown or dark brown

hair ‘down to’ or ‘falling over’ his collar

cream-coloured trousers

‘jacket’ or ‘anorak’  

shoes of a classic style

“didn’t look like a tourist” (because of wearing ‘warm clothes’).  

In this letter we will present evidence that:


1  Nuno Lourenco’s statement was a complete fabrication

2  Jane Tanner’s statement was also a complete fabrication  

3  The descriptions given were so similar that they provide the strongest possible evidence that they were planned well before Thursday, and

4  There was collusion between Jane Tanner, Nuno Lourenco and others to fake the existence of an abductor (3) (9) (10).

Continued..

D.   EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 1. A large number of false statements were made at the outset, containing a huge amount of fabricated evidence. These added credibility to the McCanns’ claim that Madeleine had been abducted on Thursday 3 May. They diverted the PJ investigation into believing that Madeleine was still alive that day.

As the PJ concluded, we agree that a hoax abduction was ‘staged’. We also agree that the furniture in the McCanns’ apartment was pre-arranged on Thursday 3 May to fake an abduction scenario. All this needed the co-operation of the McCanns and all of their Tapas 7 friends.

We also entirely agree with the PJ’s evidence (see Tavares de Almeida’s report) that there were:

*  multiple contradictions between the evidence of the witnesses

*  multiple changes of story by the chief witnesses, and

*  that the McCanns would adapt their narrative as new embarrassing facts emerged.

In fact much more evidence of these contradictions and changes of story has emerged since Gonçalo Amaral was removed from the PJ investigation on 2 October 2007. To take one example from Gonçalo Amaral’s book; he correctly identified that the accounts of Dr David Payne visiting Kate McCann in Apartment 5A were contradictory.   We have since discovered a total of at least 20 contradictions as between their two versions of what happened. (21) We hold that this is more than sufficient to prove that the alleged ‘visit’ was fabricated.
     
Three individuals in particular led the PJ investigation and Gonçalo Amaral to conclude that Madeleine must have died after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May: Jane Tanner, Nuno Lourenco and Catriona Baker, the children’s nanny.

We deal with the evidence of Nuno Lourenco and Catriona Baker below. Here we summarise why the evidence of Jane Tanner should be treated as wholly unreliable – as the PJ team itself soon recognised:

1  She and her husband Russell O’Brien were close friends of the McCanns. That means she is not an independent witness

2  On Sunday 13 May she was adamant that the man she claimed to have seen, carrying a bundle or a child, at around 9.15pm on Thursday 3 May, was Robert Murat. This identification of him by Jane Tanner was a major reason why Murat was pulled in for questioning two days later (18)

3  It has since become clear that in the hours before she was placed in a police van by the PJ, in order to see if she could identify the man she claimed to have seen, she was spoken to by a senior Leicestershire police officer, Detective Chief Superintendent Bob Small, and two staff from the British government-funded security agency, Control Risks Group (22). It is reasonable to suspect that these three people influenced Jane Tanner to make a false claim that she ‘recognised’ Robert Murat

4  In his book on the case, Gonçalo Amaral refers to the sudden arrival in Portugal of large numbers of British government, police and security personnel – staff from the Foreign Office, the British Embassy, Leicestershire Police, Scotland Yard, MI5, Special Branch, the National Police Improvement Agency, CEOP and Control Risks Group. Amaral records in his book the following (18):

QUOTE
           
    “FOR THE PROFILERS, MURAT IS THE GUILTY PARTY

    “Since Murat's first interview, which they attended, the specialists have continued to refine the profile of the suspect [Robert Murat]…according to the English profilers, there is a 90% chance that he is the guilty party…”

UNQUOTE

5  From all the above, we say there is clear evidence of a plot to ‘frame’ Robert Murat and persuade the PJ to question him and make him a formal suspect, an ‘arguido’. And this is exactly what happened on Tuesday 15 May (18).

6  In October 2007, the McCann Team released an artist’s sketch of the man said to have been seen by Jane Tanner. It was drawn up by a ‘forensic artist’, Melissa Little. She was employed by Cheshire businessman, Brian Kennedy, who directed the McCann Team’s highly controversial private investigation. The sketch did not look like Robert Murat.

7  Later, in January 2008, there was a major news story in the British press about a man with ‘straggly hair’ and a moustache, said by both the McCann Team and Leicestershire Police to be a new ‘chief suspect’.  (20) (21) (22) (23) The McCanns’ PR agent, Clarence Mitchell (who at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance was the head of the British government’s Media Monitoring Unit), held a special ‘police-style press conference’ to promote this new suspect. Once again, Melissa Little drew the artist’s sketch that was presented to the media. In some respects, the sketch resembled the earlier sketch drawn up by Jane Tanner. Jane Tanner was quoted in the British press as saying she was ‘80% sure’ that the man she said she had seen on 3 May was the same as the man with the straggly hair and the moustache. This was despite the facts that (a) she frankly admitted that she had never seen the face of the man on 3 May and (b) the man with the straggly hair and the moustache looked nothing like Robert Murat.

8  Also in January 2008, Jane Tanner admitted that she was ‘no longer sure’ that the man she had seen on 3 May was Robert Murat (29) (30) (31).

9  This admission was important because, in the two days after Robert Murat was made a formal suspect, three friends of the McCanns (Fiona Payne, Russell O’Brien and Rachael Oldfield) all made statements to the PJ claiming that they had seen Robert Murat near the McCanns’ apartment on the night of 3 May. Yet eight months later (January 2008), they admitted that they might have been ‘mistaken’. (18)

10  One more indication that Jane Tanner’s claims were false came in a press conference held by the McCann Team in August 2009 (28). This conference was held in order to promote the McCanns’ latest theory, that Madeleine had been abducted by a woman, on a yacht bound from Barcelona to Australia.  

In order to promote this theory, the McCanns’ latest chief private investigator, former Detective Sergeant, Dave Edgar, said that Jane Tanner might have been mistaken and that she saw a female carrying a child, not a male.

11  Finally, we add that on 14 October 2013, around 7 million people in Britain watched a TV programme about Madeleine’s disappearance, made by the BBC together with the Metropolitan Police (27). They had together spent over £2 million making this film. In the film, the Metropolitan Police chief investigator, Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, said that the man seen by Jane Tanner had ‘come forward’. He told us that the man’s daughter had been in the ‘night creche’ on 3 May and that he had carried his daughter, clad only in her pyjamas, back to wherever he was staying that night.

12 There were many reasons to doubt DCI Redwood’s claims (27), for example:

A  why had this man kept silent for 6 years?

B if the man had been walking past the McCanns’ apartment that night from the crèche, maps showed that he was not taking the direct route from the crèche but must have gone a longer way around  

C we were not given the identity of the man; only a blurred photograph, said to be of this man, was shown

D we were told that (i) he had been wearing exactly the same sort of clothes on holiday as those described by Jane Tanner (ii) his daughter had been wearing very similar pyjamas to those worn by Madeleine on that holiday and (iii) that he had for some unknown reason kept these very pyjamas for 6 years

E there is no explanation of (i) where the mother of this child was whilst the man was carrying her home in the dark on a cold evening (only 13 deg C) (ii) why he was not using a buggy and (iii) why his daughter was only in pyjamas, with no covering over her.


In short, none of the dozens of serious Madeleine McCann researchers in Britain believes that DCI Redwood was telling the truth. We believe it was yet another lie by the British police to continue the claim that Madeleine was abducted, when she was not.                    
 
E.   EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 2. The photograph of Madeleine McCann, Dr Gerry McCann and Amelie, taken by the Ocean Club pool


Enlarge this image


One of the most famous photographs of Madeleine is one of her, her sister Amelie, and her father Dr Gerry McCann, sitting by the Ocean Club pool. They said that this photograph was taken by her mother, Dr Kate McCann, on the last day of their holiday, Thursday 3rd May, at about 2.29pm.

We will present a summary of evidence below which suggests that this was a deliberate lie by the McCanns and by those supporting them (4) (32) (33) (34). We will show that this photograph was almost certainly taken on Sunday, 29th April at lunch-time. (4) (33) We will also show that this was the last photograph of Madeleine ever taken, with the possible exception of what we will call the ‘Make-Up Photo’ - see below (14) (15). Further, we will show that there is no credible, truly independent evidence that Madeleine was alive after the afternoon of Sunday 29th April (13). From these conclusions we will also suggest that it is unlikely that Madeleine’s death was ‘accidental’ (as suggested in the PJ’s report) and we will also suggest that Madeleine’s parents had professional help from the highest levels of the British government in order to ‘stage’ an abduction (the PJ’s own conclusion) and to help keep up the ‘myth’ of Madeleine being abducted for over 10 years (2) (4) (5).

The specific evidence relating to the ‘Last Photo’ is as follows:

1   The photograph is said to have been taken by Kate McCann. Two acknowledged experts in digital photography have examined this photograph in detail and both, independently, agreed that it was a genuine photograph with no signs of alteration or ‘photoshopping’ (33)

2  The experts also pointed out, however, that it was a relatively simple matter to change the date and time stamp, to try to prove that a photograph was taken on a different date from the actual date (33)

On 9 May, Dr Gerry McCann and a close relative, Michael Wright, presented to the PJ two computer disks which purported to show all the photos taken on the holiday by the McCanns and their friends, the Paynes. These disks included three photographs of Madeleine happily playing in the Ocean Club playground on the first day of the holiday (Saturday 28th April). But for reasons which have not been explained by the McCanns, these two disks did not include the ‘Last Photo’. (4)

3 Furthermore, it is clear from the PJ files that the two computer disks of photos were compiled with the additional help of Alex Woolfall, the Head of Risk, employed by the huge PR firm, Bell Pottinger.  He has admitted this. It is unclear why the ‘Head of Risk’ at a major public relations firm should need to sort through the McCanns’ holiday photographs (4) (33)  [NOTE: We add here the following information: 1. Sir Tim Bell, former Chairman of Bell Pottinger, admitted that the McCanns paid him over £600,000 to ‘keep their name on the newspaper front pages for a year’, and 2. This year, Bell Pottinger collapsed, and is now ‘in administration’, following revelations about a campaign of lies they conducted in South Africa to back up the discredited President, Jacob Zuma. The firm, and those who run it, have been totally discredited. Bell Pottinger also received huge payments from various corrupt regimes and individuals they worked for in different parts of the world]

4 The weather when the photo was taken   This is a crucial evidential point that the PJ had no opportunity to consider. At lunch-time on Thursday 3 May, the weather was cloudy and cool (17 deg C). This can be demonstrated from assorted weather records and photographs. By contrast, the weather on Sunday lunchtime (29th April) was sunny and very warm (21 deg C). By Monday, a cold front had already brought cooler and cloudier weather with some rain. This lasted until Friday (4) (33).  

5  Now we need to look at the evidence of the photo itself. This is what we observe:

* bright sunshine

* no evidence of any wind

* three people sitting by the pool, dipping their feet in the pool

* Dr Gerry McCann wearing T-shirt and shorts

* Madeleine and Amelia wearing light clothing

* Madeleine and Amelie both wearing sun-hats

* a sheen of perspiration on Gerry McCann’s forehead

* Gerry McCann wearing sunglasses (4) (33).

None of these features match the claim that this photograph was taken on Thursday 3rd May. They all match, however, with the only sunny and warm day of the holiday: Sunday 29th April.

The photograph was not produced by the McCanns until Thursday 24 May. Why, when it was already in the McCanns’ camera, was it not produced straightaway, when the police and the press required the most up-to-date photo of Madeleine?    
                 
F.   EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 3. The absence of photographs of Madeleine taken after Sunday.

Only five photographs of Madeleine on that holiday are claimed to exist.

We have mentioned four of them:

1, 2, 3  There were three photographs of Madeleine taken on the Saturday. Dr Gerry McCann handed these to the PJ on 9 May 2007

4  There is the ‘Last Photo’, which the McCanns say was taken on Thursday 3rd May. However, we have shown that it must have been taken on Sunday 29th April.  

That leaves just one other photo which the McCanns claim was taken on that holiday: the so-called ‘Tennis Balls Photo’, which purports to show Madeleine clutching some tennis balls.  

There are numerous problems with this photo (35) (36 (37). The main four are:

1  Two different people are said to have taken it (Kate McCann and Jane Tanner)

2  They claim they were taken on two different days (Tuesday and Thursday), and

3  The improbability of Kate McCann’s account (in her 2011 book, ‘madeleine’) of how the photograph came to be taken (she writes of how she ran back to her apartment to get her camera, while Madeleine was apparently there, waiting for this photograph to be taken

4  The photograph appears inconsistent with what is said by Kate McCann. There are no other children in shot. There are no children’s nannies or tennis coaches in shot, the balls that the girl in the photo is holding are adult balls, not the soft balls that children would use when playing mini-tennis.

Furthermore, there is no independent witness (such as a crèche nanny or tennis coach) of how and when this photograph is supposed to have been taken.

In addition, some observers have noted that whilst the head of the girl in the photograph is clearly that of Madeleine, the body of the girl looks different from Madeleine in a number of ways. Notably the girls’ legs look sturdier, as if they are of an older girl, and her arms and legs have a number of marks, possibly bruises and scratches, and look red and sunburnt when compared with the pale skin of Madeleine, as seen on the three photographs of Madeleine on Saturday, and the ‘Last Photo’ which we are sure was taken on the Sunday. (4) (35) (36) (37)

Therefore we have no proof of any photograph of Madeleine being taken on the Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday that week. That is wholly consistent with our case that Madeleine died on the Sunday.

We should add that a Mr Philip Edmonds, a Director of Stemcor, the international steel company, was on holiday that week with his three sons, and claimed to have taken a photograph of his three sons playing in the Ocean Club playground, on Thursday 3rd May, showing Madeleine McCann in the background. He further claimed publicly that he had sent this photograph to the PJ. However, no such photograph appears in the PJ files, not has it been published elsewhere. There is every reason to doubt whether – even if he has supplied such a photograph – that it could prove that Madeleine was alive that day (38).    

G.   EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 4. The fabricated statement of Nuno Lourenco, who tried to identify Wojchiech Krokowski as a potential child-kidnapper who had tried to abduct his daughter on Sagres beach.

Nuno Lourenco claimed he was living in Germany but had been over to Sagres for a short holiday to see his mother, who still lives in the area. (8)

Early on Saturday 5th May, he contacted the PJ to say that a man had been photographing children (including his own) on Sagres beach during the afternoon of Sunday 29th April (although Goncalo Amaral gives a different date for this in his book). (8) (18)

Nuno Lourenco provided a photograph in support of his claims. He said that he had managed to take a photograph of the man on his mobile ’phone before he drove away. He also gave the police the last four digits of the car registration number of the vehicle. (8)

With this information, the Portuguese police were able to establish that the owner of the car was a car rental agency based in Burgau, and that the car had been rented for the week by a Mr Wojchiech Krokowski. Krokowski and his wife had been holidaying at an apartment in the Sol e Mar building in Burgau. The police later established further details about Krokowski and his wife from the owner or manager of the Burgau Beach Bar (believed to be Mr Ralph Eveleigh or his manager), a CCTV in a shop in Lisbon, and the Polish Police. (8) (18)

It is clear from what we said in our introduction that Gonçalo Amaral and his PJ team believed that Nuno Lourenco had identified the same man as seen by Jane Tanner. (18)

If we now compare the descriptions by Jane Tanner (of the man she said she saw) and by Nuno Lourenco (of the man we now know to have been Wojchiech Krokowski),  the similarities are astonishing, as we now set out in this table:

Jane Tanner description of the man            Lourenco description of Krokowski    

aged between 35 and 40                              aged 40

dark brown hair, falling over his collar          brown hair down to his collar

wearing cream or beige trousers                  wearing cream-coloured trousers

wearing black shoes in the classic style       shoes of a classic style

warmly dressed, the reason she                   did not look like a tourist
thought he was not a tourist          

We make these observations on Nuno Lourenco’s statement (3):

1 The account he gives of the attempted kidnap lacks credibility in several respects:

A  why would a holidaymaker, with his car apparently parked some way away outside the village, attempt (in broad daylight) to kidnap a child?

B  why are there no other witnesses to this incident?

C  his account of how he tried to take a photo of Krokowski, but failed because his finger was blocking the viewfinder, also lacks credibility

D his account of what actually happened inside and outside the café also does not have the ‘ring of truth’ about it

he did not report what (if true) must have been a frightening incident to the police until six days later

he laid great emphasis on how the date and time stamp on his mobile ’phone ‘proved’ that the photograph of Krokowski’s car was taken around 6pm on Sunday 29th April. This reminds us of another photograph, the ‘Last Photo’, was said to have been taken on Thursday 3 May, according to the date stamp, yet evidence suggests that it was taken four days earlier. We suggest that it is likely in all the circumstances that Lourenco took this photograph later in the week, but date-stamped it to fool the PJ team into thinking it was taken on the Sunday

he did not ’phone the police until six days later, and waited until after Jane Tanner had given her statement to the police

moreover, he waited until around the time that the plane taking Krokowski and his wife back to Poland was taking off from faro Airport. This seems to us like more than a coincidence (9) (10).

Taking all these matters into account, and having regard also to the astonishing coincidences between the descriptions given by Jane Tanner (of the man) and Nuno Lourenco (of Wojchiech Krokowski), we arrive at these very disturbing conclusions:

Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco were describing the same man – Wojchiech Krokowski

The description must therefore have been based on Wojchiech Krokowski and what he was wearing that week

Either Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco must have colluded in order to give police identical descriptions, OR at least one third party must have planned this collusion, and given them instructions on what to say to the police (3).

This means that Jane Tanner, Nuno Lourenco, and any or all people who colluded in deceiving the police in this way have committed the offence (in English law) of perverting the course of justice. In English law this offence attracts the maximum penalty of 14 years.

[ NOTE: We add here the strange matter of the evidence of three members of the Smith family, who claimed to have seen a man carrying a girl dressed only in pyjamas at about 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May. What is astonishing is that when they travelled to Portugal to give their statements on 26 May, they also gave an almost identical description of the man they claimed they saw to those given by Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco.  

The Smiths also described a man ‘about 35-40’, ‘wearing cloth clothes’, ‘wearing classic shoes’, and who ‘didn’t look like a tourist’. The girl he was carrying was also dressed only in white/pink pyjamas.

If we are correct in asserting that Madeleine was probably dead on Sunday, then what possible explanation can there be for him reporting seeing someone, at about 10.00pm on Thursday 3rd May, identical to the descriptions of a man given by Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco?

It raises a realistic possibility that this was also a fabrication, and that Martin Smith and his family were also using the same description of Wojchiech Krokowski.

We may add that on 20th September 2007, eleven days after seeing TV footage of Gerry McCann carrying his son Sean down the steps of an aeroplane, Martin Smith claimed (with 60% to 80% certainty] that the man he said he had seen on 3rd May was Gerry McCann. Yet despite that, he admits to having been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy, head of the McCanns’ private investigation, in December 2007, and since then has clearly been working with the McCanns, making public statements sympathising with the McCanns and urging the public to ‘look for the abductor’ ].  (3)  

H.   EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 5. The unreliable evidence of the children’s nanny, Catriona Baker, Dr Gerry McCann and Dr Kate McCann about an alleged ‘high tea’ at the Ocean Club Tapas restaurant, at about 5pm to 6pm on Thursday 3 May

The crucial evidence that Madeleine was still alive at 5.30pm on Thursday 3rd May came from one of the nannies, Catriona Baker (39) (40) (41). She was also the crèche nanny for Madeleine’s daytime group, the ‘Lobsters’. Both Tavares de Almeida and Gonçalo Amaral in his book were certain that she was telling the truth, and that, because she was thought to be an ‘independent’ witness, they could rely on her word (18).

Detailed investigation, however, has uncovered a mass of contradictions as between the four main witnesses who gave evidence about this alleged ‘high tea’ on the Thursday afternoon: Dr Gerry McCann, Kate McCann, and crèche nannies Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington (12).  These contradictions have been analysed by many Madeleine researchers. All have come to the conclusion that the contradictions are so many and so serious that it is highly doubtful that this ‘high tea’ happened at all. It is simply not possible to accept Catriona Baker as a witness of truth.

Furthermore, research has uncovered the fact that Catriona Baker probably knew the McCanns before this holiday (4).

Records on the social media group Facebook show that Catriona Baker was, in 2006 and possible before then, a Facebook friend of Chloe Corner. Chloe Corner is the daughter of Madeleine’s godfather, Jon Corner. Jon Corner was highly involved in events after Madeleine was reported missing. Within hours, he was seemingly able to send unlimited photos of Madeleine to the media, from his home in Liverpool. In addition, Jon Corner said he had been to Praia da Luz several times previously, suggesting a connection with the village. Jon Corner also lived with the McCanns for around a week in August 2007, during which time he took them to Huelva to distribute leaflets about Madeleine. He made a film about Madeleine which was later used by Panorama for their programme about Madeleine shown on 19 November 2017 (4).  

In November 2007, six months after Madeleine was reported missing, Catriona Baker visited the McCanns in Rothley, staying with them for a number of days. There are also indications from Kate McCann’s account of Catriona Baker in her book, ‘madeleine’, that she may have known her already, although she does not admit to this (4).

These connections of Catriona Baker to Jon Corner and the McCanns were not known to the PJ team nor to Gonçalo Amaral. If they had been, they would certainly not have been so ready to regard her as an ‘independent’ witness.  

I.   EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 6. The lack of any credible, independent evidence by anybody that Madeleine McCann was seen alive after Sunday 29th April

We have said that Madeleine was seen alive on Sunday 29th April at lunch-time. We have given evidence that we cannot rely on the claims by Catriona Baker and the McCanns that Madeleine was alive at an alleged ‘high tea’ on Thursday afternoon. (Charlotte Pennington later gave a statement about this alleged ‘high tea’ but that also contradicted the other three statements).

All other claims by witnesses who claim to have seen Madeleine after Sunday have been examined in detail by a British ex-pat now living in Canada, Lizzy Taylor (13). She concluded that apart from the evidence given by the McCanns and their Tapas 7 friends - which of course is not independent – all other statements claiming to have seen her were open to serious doubt. Many were extremely vague, with no checkable details given. Others were plainly wrong, for example, witnesses claiming to have seen Madeleine eating breakfast with the McCanns in the Millennium when the McCanns in their statements have consistently said they ate breakfast in their apartment every day from Monday onwards.

The absence of any other reliable witness to seeing Madeleine from Monday onwards is disturbing, and strongly tends to confirm that Madeleine was not alive after Sunday.      

J.   EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 7. The mystery of the strange ‘Make-Up Photo’ of Madeleine, which appears to have been taken on Sunday 29th April.




The ‘Make-Up Photo’ was first published in a short, 2-minute video made by Madeleine’s godfather, Jon Corner. It shows Madeleine with a great deal of make-up, namely:

a necklace

a hair bead

lipstick

eye shadow, and

eye liner.  

It must also be said that Madeleine has very dilated (large) pupils in the photo, and there is no sign whatsoever of any happiness or joy. Rather, she looks deeply sad. Many observers have understandably called it a ‘Lolita’ photograph (42).

When this photo was published, it attracted much negative comment, including in one British broadsheet newspaper, the Independent. A prominent criminologist, Mark Williams-Thomas, also criticized the McCanns for releasing this photograph (although it is by no means certain that the McCanns gave permission for this photograph to be published) (42).

The McCanns claimed that the Make-Up Photo showed Madeleine ‘playing with Mummy’s make-up box’ and told the media that the picture was taken ‘a few weeks before’ their Praia da Luz holiday (42).

Many Madeleine researchers who have studied this photograph carefully have made these observations about it (14) (15):

Madeleine could not have applied the eyeliner herself. She could not have applied either the lipstick or the blue eye-shadow neatly. She certainly could not have put on her necklace herself, nor her hair bead. An adult must have done all this, but we have not been told who did it. Therefore the McCanns have not been truthful about the circumstances in which this photograph was taken. That means we are entitled to ask serious questions about when, where and why it was taken.  

In the photo, we see Madeleine’s pupils dilated (enlarged)

Madeleine displays no signs of fun, joy or happiness in this photo, as you would expect if she was having fun playing with Mummy’s make-up box. On the contrary, there seems to be a look of sadness, or even fear or dread in her eyes.

The photo is taken against a stucco background, either cream, yellow or ochre in colour. This is most unlike houses built in England. However, it strongly resembles the outdoor cladding of many buildings along the Algarve coast in Portugal.  

Madeleine’s appearance in the Make Up Photo is strikingly similar to how she looks in the ‘Last Photo’, which we assert was taken on the Sunday. In both photos:

Madeleine’s hair length, style and colour is identical

in both, she is wearing a hair bead (although in different positions), and

in both, she can be seen wearing a pink-coloured smock, top or dress.

Especially given what we have said in point (5) above, we are entitled to ask whether this photo could have been taken on the McCanns’ holiday in Praia da Luz, possibly even on the very same day as the Last Photo – Sunday, 29th April.

Continued..

K.   Clear photographic evidence that the very 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 5th June 2007, the other in Amsterdam, Holland, on 7th June 2007.

Here we rely, first, on evidence that can be viewed on the film: ‘Madeleine: Why the Cover-Up?’ by Richard D Hall, link here:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VWWjkL-joS4&t=1321s  (4)

Second, we rely on the longer, written analysis by Dr Martin Roberts in an article titled ‘A Nightwear Job’, which can be viewed here: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12555-dr-martin-roberts-a-nightwear-job  (16)

In summary, the film by Hall and the article by Dr Roberts reveal the following:

* Madeleine’s pyjamas were photographed by the McCanns before they raised the alarm about Madeleine being missing at about 10.00pm on 3 May

* Very clear photographic evidence (and other accompanying evidence) proves that the identical pair of pyjamas were personally displayed by the McCanns at two press conferences, one in London on 5th June 2007, the other in Amsterdam, Holland, on 7th June 2007.

It follows from these two facts that the entire claim by the McCanns that Madeleine was abducted - in her pyjamas, between 9.15pm and 10.00pm - is false. Madeleine must therefore have disappeared under entirely different circumstances. As Dr Roberts out it in his article: “If Madeleine’s pyjamas were not abducted, then neither was Madeleine”.  

OBJECTIONS TO OUR THEORY

A number of objections have been raised to our hypothesis. We list them here and give brief answers:

1 ‘It would be impossible for so many people to lie about the death of a missing girl and take part in a cover-up’

2 ‘No-one would dare to stage a hoax abduction after their child had been dead 3-4 days’

3 ‘The McCanns and their friends could not have all agreed to cover up a child’s death’

4 ‘It is impossible to believe that Catriona Baker, Madeleine’s crèche nanny, could help to forge the crèche records and lie about Madeleine not being in the crèche from Monday onwards’

5 ‘Mrs Fenn heard Madeleine crying for her Daddy between 10.30pm and 11.45pm on Tuesday 1 May’.


In reply, we make the following points:

So far as Mrs Fenn’s evidence is concerned, there are several major problems about it:

* she did not make statements about having heard Madeleine crying until 20th August, over 3½ months after Tuesday 1st May (4) (43)

* neither did she make statements about an alleged break-in at her flat until 20th August  (4) (44)

* a review of all the statements she made about the alleged burglary reveals major contradictions e.g. about when the burglary was supposed to have happened, what actually happened inside her flat, how the intruder escaped, and who else was there at the time (44)

* the evidence she gave was leaked in advance and was published in the British press on 18 & 19 August i.e. before she gave her statement, suggesting that she colluded with others in giving her evidence  (4) (43) (44)

* she claims to have heard Madeleine crying ever more loudly for 75 minutes – but no-one else in the apartment bloc heard this

* she contrived her statement to say that the crying was that of a child ‘more than two years old’ – but it is not possible to make such a clear distinction between the crying of a three-year-old and a two-year old

*  she did not seek any help in alerting anyone else to the crying she said she heard, except an alleged telephone call to a Mrs Edna Glyn, which as far as we know from the PJ files the Portuguese police were unable to verify, and

* she herself told the media to ignore all that had been said in the newspapers about her evidence.
There are further details about the multiple problems with her evidence at these references: (43) (44)

In response to the other points above, we simply do not know how Madeleine died, especially now that it seems certain that she died on the Sunday or possibly Monday. It is possible, in fact we say probable, that she may have died under circumstances where the McCanns and their friends felt there was serious risk for them if Madeleine’s body was to be produced for an autopsy. At this point we mention the sexually suggestive remarks made by Dr David Payne about Madeleine, as reported on 19th May 2007 by Dr Arul and Dr Katarina Gaspar. We also think it is relevant to point out that the Gaspars’ two statements were not forwarded to the PJ until three weeks after Gonçalo Amaral had been removed from the case.          

It has been suggested that Madeleine’s death could not have been covered up because far too many people must have been involved. In reply, we suggest that only a handful of people would be needed to keep Madeleine’s death a secret. By Sunday night, Madeleine would not be known by many people except the McCanns, their ‘Tapas 7’ friends and Catriona Baker, Madeleine’s crèche nanny (who, as we have evidenced, seems to have been a friend of the McCann family already). Possibly the Ocean Club Manager and someone from Mark Warner may have been informed and a collective decision made to keep Madeleine’s death a secret and plan a hoax abduction (45) (46) (47).

If Madeleine’s death was the result of any criminality, that would be a powerful reason for those involved to cover up what had happened. A cover-up and hoax abduction could then have been carried out in total secrecy.

The facts point to death on Sunday, or Monday at the latest.

This, we suggest, opens up a vital new line of enquiry. This, we suggest, must be the starting-point for a fresh Portuguese police investigation.

We conclude by suggesting what we think must be obvious by now to the Portuguese authorities: namely that the Metropolitan Police investigation into Madeleine’s death, Operation Grange, has clearly never been a genuine attempt by the British police to get to the truth of what really happened to Madeleine.

We add many references below and would be willing to assist the Portuguese judicial and police authorities in any further way that we can.    

Yours sincerely

(Redacted)
For the Madeleine McCann Research Group        


LIST OF REFERENCES

1 What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann, by ‘PeterMac’  (retired British Police Superintendent)  http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/ and at

http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/retired-police-superintendent-peter.html

2 “The True Story of Madeleine McCann”, 1st Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall  
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WIjPcvmVzUo

3 “The Phantoms: Four fake abductors”, 2nd Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall, 2nd Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall (examines the fake abduction accounts of Jane Tanner, Nino Lourenco, Martin Smith and the Metropolitan Police) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dL0-ePd3FCU

4 “When Madeleine Died?”, 3rd Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall    
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=70oo2-Sj7to949 (comprehensive evidence that Madeleine died on Sunday 29 April)

5 “Madeleine – Why the Cover-Up?” 4th Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall    
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQgmtrOeDLM (Part 1 of 6 parts)

6 Intercalary (interim) report of Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida, 10 September 2007, Portuguese Policia Judiciara files, http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/TAVARES_ALMEIDA.htm

7 The SIX photos that provide the biggest clue to when Madeleine died,  CMOMM forum,
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14797-the-six-photos-that-provide-the-biggest-clue-to-when-madeleine-died

8 NUNO LOURENCO STATEMENT
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/NUNO_LOURENCO.htm

9 “Was Wojcek Krokowski, Sagres man with a camera, the template for both Tannerman and Smithman?”, CMOMM forum,  https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10602-was-wojcek-krokowski-sagres-man-with-a-camera-the-template-for-both-tannerman-and-smithman?

10 “Krokowski 2: Nuno Lourenco’s account of how Wojchiech Krokowski nearly kidnapped his child”, CMOMM forum, https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12096-krokowski-2-nuno-lourenco-s-account-of-how-wojchiech-krokowski-nearly-kidnapped-his-child

11 “Textusa article 30 October 2015 on ‘Sagresman’ (Wojchiech Krokowski)…”, CMOMM forum, https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12123-textusas-article-30-oct-2015-on-sagresman-wojchiech-krokowski-a-good-article-excellent-original-research-some-great-conclusions-but-some-wrong-ones?highlight=krokowski

12 “Catriona Baker and the Creche”, Hideho/Lizzy Taylor,
http://forum4.aimoo.com/madeleinemccanncontroversy/HiDeHo-RESEARCH-POSTS/Catriona-Baker-the-Creche-Post-1-2276097.html

13 “Was Madeleine Seen After Sunday? – Is there any credible evidence that she was? (28 September 2015), Hideho/Lizzy Taylor, https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11921-was-madeleine-seen-after-sunday

14 “The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo: Was it taken on the same day as the ‘Last Photo?”, CMOMM forum,  https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12958-the-mystery-of-the-make-up-photo-was-it-taken-on-the-same-day-as-the-last-photo?

15 “Richard Hall’s Appeal for new Information re Madeleine’s Make-Up Photo”, CMOMM forum, https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14749-richard-d-hall-s-appeal-for-new-information-re-madeleine-s-make-up-photo-and-the-thermometer-on-the-wall

16 “A Nightwear Job”, by Dr Martin Roberts, posted on the CMOMM forum,  
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12555-dr-martin-roberts-a-nightwear-job

17 “Out, Damn’d Spot”, by Dr Martin Roberts, posted on the CMOMM forum (Madeleine’s pyjamas) https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t5489-out-damned-spot

18 “A Verdade da Mentira” (English translation by AnnEsse: ‘The Truth of the Lie’), by Goncalo Amaral (2008) [NOTE: Some words of this translation have been amended by Paulo Reis who has translated this letter]

19 JANE TANNER 1st STATEMENT, 4 May 2007
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER.htm

20 JANE TANNER 2nd STATEMENT, 10 May 2007
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JANE-TANNER-10MAY.htm

21 “YES or NO? Did Dr David Payne visit Dr Kate McCann on the evening Madeleine was reported missing? - 20 CONTRADICTIONS which suggest that this visit never took place”
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10076-yes-or-no-did-dr-david-payne-visit-dr-kate-mccann-on-the-evening-madeleine-was-reported-missing-20-contradictions-which-suggest-that-this-visit-never-took-place

22 “The ‘Niggle’ and the Strange Tale of Robert Murat: Was it a Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice? ”, Paulo Reis, https://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2009/04/niggle-and-strange-tale-of-robert-murat.html

23 “Is this the man who abducted Madeleine? Two witnesses give similar descriptions”, Guardian, 20 January 2008, https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/jan/21/world.ukcrime

24 “Hunt for new Madeleine McCann Suspect, Daily Telegraph, 20 January 2008, https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1576048/Hunt-for-new-Madeleine-McCann-suspect.html

25 “New Sketch Of 'Creepy Madeleine Suspect”, by Joana Morais,
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2008/01/new-sketch-of-creepy-madeleine-suspect.html

26 “A Joint Investigation”, Duarte Levy,
https://duartelevyen.wordpress.com/2008/08/23/a-joint-investigation/

27  “BBC Crimewatch McCann Special, 14 October, 2013”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ8jmdWlB8Y

28  “Why did Madeleine McCann Detectives ask so few Questions, after a Major Breakthrough?”, Daily Mail, August 2009  http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1206842/Why-did-Madeleine-McCann-detectives-ask-questions.html

29  “The Mystery of Robert Murat: From Arguido to Applause”, Sections F et seq  https://www.yumpu.com/en/document/view/30775111/the-mystery-of-robert-murat-from-arguido-to-applause-part-two

30  “Clarence Mitchell Spinning for the McCanns – and for Jane Tanner”, by Joana Morais,
https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2010/02/video-clarence-mitchell-spinning-for.html

31 “Clarence Mitchell Interview for Channel 4” (Mitchell evades questions about why Jane Tanner identified Robert Murat as the abductor)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFZy2f2yQJA

32  “Another Look at the Last Photo”, CMOMM forum,
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t10497-another-look-at-the-last-photo

33 “CHAPER 14: The Last Photo/The Pool Photo by ‘PeterMac’”          
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13435-chapter-14-the-last-photo-the-pool-photo

34  “Alex Woolfall Knows: The Last Photo and other photos of Madeleine in Praia da Luz”, on CMOMM forum,
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t7718-alex-woolfall-knows-the-last-photo-and-other-photos-of-madeleine-in-praia-da-luz

35 “CHAPTER 22: The Tennis Balls by ‘PeterMac’”          
http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/2016/08/chapter-22-tennis-balls-photo.html

36 “When was the Tennis Balls Photo taken?”, CMOMM forum,
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12585-when-was-the-tennis-balls-pic-taken

37 “Recap on the Tennis Balls Photo”,
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t8010-recap-on-the-tennis-balls-photo

38 “Philip Edmonds, Deputy Chairman of Stemcor and Nephew of Lady Margaret Hodge”, CMOMM forum, https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t9811-philip-edmonds-deputy-chairman-of-stemcor-and-nephew-of-lady-margaret-hodge-pictures-of-madeleine-and-the-letters-between-tony-bennett-philip-edmonds-in-2011

39 “STATEMENT OF CATRIONA BAKER (Madeleine’s trip to the beach)”
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CATRIONA-TREASA-B.htm

40 “1ST STATEMENT OF CATRIONA BAKER, 6 May 2007”
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CATRIONA-TREASA.htm

41 “ROGATORY STAYEMENT – CATRIONA BAKER, 18 April 2018”
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/CAT_BAKER.htm

42 “60 Reasons why the McCanns should never have published THAT photo: The Make-Up ‘Lolita’ Photo”
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t1912-60-reasons-why-the-mccanns-should-never-have-published-that-photo-the-make-up-lolita-photo

43 “10 Reasons which suggest that Pamela Fenn did not hear any child crying on Tuesday 1 May 2007*, CMOMM forum, https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11939-10-reasons-which-suggest-that-pamela-fenn-did-not-hear-any-child-crying-on-tuesday-1-may-2007

44 “Was there an attempted burglary of Mrs Pameal Fenn’s flat in the week before Madeleine was reported missing?” https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11905-was-there-an-attempted-burglary-of-mrs-pamela-fenns-flat-in-the-weeks-before-madeleine-was-reported-missing?highlight=fenn

45  “Planning the abduction hoax: Was it done over four days or four hours?”, by MMRG, on the CMOMM forum, https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14704-planning-the-abduction-hoax-was-it-done-over-four-days-or-four-hours

46 “What really happened to Madeleine McCann: Was she killed on Sunday 29thh April?”, CMOMM forum,  https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14249-what-really-happened-to-madeleine-mccann-was-she-killed-on-sunday-29-april

47  “Madeleine McCann could not have died from an accident, nor from anything else, after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007”
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13044-madeleine-mccann-could-not-have-died-from-an-accident-nor-from-anything-else-after-5-30pm-on-thursday-3-may-2007

Continued..



Madeleine McCann may have died before May 3, 2007

British researchers wrote to the Portuguese Public Prosecutor

A group of researchers, mostly British but also some Portuguese, has for the past ten years been analysing the case of the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann. The group, which consists mainly of ex-police officers, former criminal investigators and information analysts, also includes some specialists in digital photography, lawyers, solicitors, English-Portuguese translators, etc.

In June 2017, the group sent letters to Prime Minister Theresa May and Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick, criticising the way British police investigations had been carried out until then. However, the letters received only formal replies, saying that their content would be transmitted to the police officers responsible for the investigation.

On March 6th, the same group of investigators sent a detailed letter, including new and credible evidence, to the Attorney General of the Portuguese Republic, Dra. Joana Marques Vidal. The letter set out their analysis and their working hypothesis of what happened to Madeleine. These findings are considered "important" by one of the members of the group who spoke to us and, in his view, "could help Portuguese researchers find out what happened to Madeleine."

In short, their conclusions point to the fact that it is almost certain that the child died between the afternoon of Sunday 29th and Monday 30th April and that her body was hidden and a hoax abduction was acted out on the night of Thursday 3rd May. One of the aspects highlighted in the letter is the question of the so-called ‘Last Photo’ of Madeleine, reproduced above. It was released by the McCanns three weeks after her reported disappearance. It shows Gerry McCann, wearing sunglasses, with Maddie and Amélie by the pool of the Ocean Club. According to the McCanns, the photo was taken at lunchtime on May 3rd, when the child disappeared.


"At lunchtime on Thursday, May 3rd, the sky was overcast and the weather was cold (17 degrees Celsius). This has been proved through an examination of a broad set of meteorological data and photographs. By contrast, the weather on Sunday at lunchtime (April 29th) was sunny and quite hot (21 degrees Celsius). On Monday, a cold front brought cooler, overcast weather with some rain. This cloudier, cooler weather continued until Friday (May 4th)." Reference number 33 in their letter sent to the PGR shows why doubts arise as to whether the photo could have been taken on the Thursday.

On the other hand, in their long letter, British researchers point out that between Sunday and the date of the disappearance, there are no witnesses who can be considered to have given credible evidence of having seen the child. Only the McCanns’ friends and a creche nanny, Catriona Baker, confirm having seen Madeleine after Sunday.

Curiously, Catriona Baker appears in 2006 as a friend on Facebook of Jon Corner's daughter, Amélie's godfather and close friend of the McCanns. Later, shortly after the McCanns returned to England, Miss Baker stayed at the McCanns’ home for several days.

These are some of the points that, from the outset, are highlighted in the extensive letter. However, a number of other aspects are also addressed, which will constitute, according to the conclusions, evidence that the claim of Madeleine being abducted was concocted – with the "creation" of suspects and a premeditated plan to blame Robert Murat for the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

- Letter sent to the Office of the Prosecutor-General by a group ofBritish investigators about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

https://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.co.uk/2018/03/madeleine-mccann-may-have-died-before.html
"Portugal Resident":
Attorney General receives “new theory” in disappearance of Madeleine McCann
Madeleine McCann may have died before May 3, 2007  - (Madeleine McCann Disappearence blog)
Letter from a group of British investigators to the Portuguese Public Prosecutor, about the Madeleine McCann Case


Paulo Reis

On Sunday 3rd May, there will be a blizzard of reports in the TV and print media marking what they say is the 13th anniversary of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

But is this the true date that Madeleine 'disappeared'? 

The official story is that sometime between 9.15pm and 10.00pm on Thursday 3rd May 2007, an abductor either broke through the shutters of the bedroom where Madeleine and her brother and sister were sleeping, entered via a closed window, or walked through an unlocked patio door (the stories have changed over time), and carried Madeleine away in the darkness, not seen or heard by anyone, and never to be seen again. 

Many people simply do not believe this version of events. The Portuguese Police decided in September 2007 that the abduction story was a deliberate hoax, and accordingly pulled her parents in for questioning, and made them official suspects. They alleged that Madeleine had died earlier and that the McCanns, with others, had conspired to hide her body.

There was strong evidence for this. One of the top dog handlers in the world, Martin Grime, who now works for the FBI, was called in by the Portuguese Police in July 2007. His two springer spaniels, one which alerted to the odour of a dead body and the other which alerted to blood, detected the presence of one or other of these in 17 different locations associated with the McCanns: in their holiday flat, on their clothes, and in a car they used. Subsequently, the DNA in blood samples recovered from the flat revealed that it could have been Madeleine's.

The many other reasons why the police suspected Madeleine was already dead and that the McCanns had conducted a cunning hoax abduction can be found in a report from Tavares, De, Almeida at the link below.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t16264-the-report-of-tavares-de-almeida-10-sep-2007?highlight=almeida

Since 2007, a group of researchers, including former solicitors, police officers and lawyers, photographic and other forensic experts, have concluded that there is strong evidence that Madeleine may have died on Sunday 29th April 2007 - in other words, FOUR DAYS before she was officially reported missing.

This remarkable evidence may be viewed on the internet forum: 'Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann' or by viewing five documentaries by professional researcher Richard Hall. 

This, we believe is the true story:

Madeleine McCann, born in England, 12 May 2003, died in Portugal, 29 April 2007, aged 3 years and 11 months. 

In 3 days times, the media will be, once again, exploiting Madeleine, milking this case for all they can and promoting that old line,

"Madeleine McCann disappeared from her parents apartment on the evening of May 3rd whilst that ate at the local Tapas bar"

It seems that this line, or words to that effect, are promoted in nearly every news report that has come out since 2007.  Why do they need to keep plugging this detail? Why is this line so important?

We must remember that Tony Blair, almost immediately dispatched the head of his media monitoring unit, Clarence Mitchell, whose job it was to "control what comes out in the press", to work as a PR officer for the McCanns.  We may ask, why would the Prime Minister of Great Britain, need to send out someone, who controls what comes out in press?

The McCanns were lucky to strike a number of deals to sell their stories to the press, including the serialisation of Kates' book "madeleine" in The Sun.

Further to this, why is there very little record of the events of April 29th and 30th 2007?  Not even in Kates' book. Why is this so vague?

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15533-april-29th-why-so-vague?highlight=vague