Re: The latest McCann suspect: Scotland Yard has revealed vital new information about a suspect wanted in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

by Doug D 11.06.20 10:10

‘……there is evidence………’

Is he talking dogs?

'Portuguese police still believe Madeleine McCann's parents killed her.....'

Did they ever believe that?

'working with the Portuguese authorities over the 2007 disappearance of Madeleine is "time consuming" as both sides have differing opinions on what happened to the missing three-year-old'

Why do opinions matter? Surely they should be just sifting through the evidence again.

‘…..it is now a German investigation……………’????????

What will OG say about that. They have already tried to hijack it themselves.

Madeleine McCann case: Police in Portugal remain convinced parents killed daughter, says prosecutor

Hans Christian Wolters, state prosecutor in Braunschweig, says there is evidence suggesting Madeleine McCann is dead

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] and [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] IN PRAIA DA LUZ11 June 2020 • 7:46am

Portuguese police still believe Madeleine McCann's parents killed her, a German prosecutor has claimed, as he exposed the "cumbersome" working relationship between rival forces.

Hans Christian Wolters, the state prosecutor in Braunschweig, northern Germany, said working with the Portuguese authorities over the 2007 disappearance of Madeleine is "time consuming" as both sides have differing opinions on what happened to the missing three-year-old.

It was Mr Wolters who announced last week that a 43-year-old German man - later identified as convicted paedophile Christian B - was now the key suspect in her disappearance.

He insists it is now a "German investigation" and evidence is passed to the Portuguese police when appropriate....

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

by **PeterMac** 11.06.20 10:26

The inability of reporters and journalists to look for the facts that have been reported is staggering.

So far as I am aware - - - the Portuguese NEVER thought anything of the sort, and were very clear what they did think. They they recorded what they thought and submited it to many people and several courts over many years.

Quite why a journalist cannot discover this for her/himself is baffling – or perhaps not

by **PeterMac** 11.06.20 10:35

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

Pat B has said what many of us have mused on, but hesitated to put into print.
(Clearly not the full story, since there are several other evidential points which must be included, but there are also ways of modifying this to include some of them)

QUOTE:
Let’s look at his ex-girlfriend’s statement.

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

Okay, first of all, we don’t know that he really said this. Ex-girlfriends may make stuff up or disremember something or exaggerate something. What he said or didn’t actually say may have nothing to do with this case at all.

But, let’s suppose it did. What would it mean? Well, it certainly doesn’t sound like something a child predator says to his girlfriend. He wouldn’t tell her of a child he is planning to abduct. He also doesn’t think that abducting that child (which would end with her death a few hours later at most) will change his life because he would expect to do it and be done with it. Then, he would go back to his normal life.

Secondly, he wouldn’t call abduction a “job.” And it wouldn’t be a “horrible job.” It would be fun.

So, if he really WAS going to do a “horrible job,” what would this mean. “Job” means someone has hired you and “horrible” means it isn’t pleasant. And if it would change his life, it would mean he was going to make a lot of money for doing it. That he wouldn’t be seen for a while would mean he was going to lie low.

So, if he did take Maddie, the only explanation would be at the request of the McCanns. This would be a job, an unpleasant one of removing a body of a small child, and one that would pay well. If the man were hired to do such a thing, it would explain why there was no sign of an abduction because the door would have been left unlocked for him. It would explain why nothing was disturbed. It could explain why drugging two children might be necessary and why the parents would have to be out that evening and why Gerry would be lurking around at a certain time. It could explain Smithman with a little girl in his arms and it could explain why the McCanns did not want Smithman to be identified. It could explain why the dogs had no trouble identifying cadaver odor behind the sofa.
UNQUOTE

by Doug D 11.06.20 10:36

Pat Brown blog from yesterday.

Moving away from ‘after 5.30 on the Thursday’ maybe?

‘I know many of you might say this means that Maddie was dead for many days. I still would think that is an unlikely scenario. It is far more likely that something would have only happened the day before and there was less than 24 hours to figure out what to do. The evening was still a mess and reeks of panic.’

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

by cookiemuncher 11.06.20 10:59

PeterMac wrote:The inability of reporters and journalists to look for the facts that have been reported is staggering.

So far as I am aware - - - the Portuguese NEVER thought anything of the sort, and were very clear what they did think. They they recorded what they thought and submited it to many people and several courts over many years.

Quite why a journalist cannot discover this for her/himself is baffling – or perhaps not

It's even more staggering that a German prosecutor can miss all the facts written out in front of his eyes, the PJ files and Amaral's book that the PJ believe Madeleine's death was an accident and that she wasn't "killed" by her parents. If he is going along this way of thinking how many prosecutions has he made in his career without knowing all of the facts, quite frightening when you think about it and why is he ignoring the findings of Eddie and Keela. Surely many German cases must have used blood and cadaver dogs over the years, otherwise why train them at great expense.

If the German police and prosecutor think they are so correct why are they worried about what the PJ say and do. Perhaps they know that the PJ are correct but are going along with the UK police and prosecutor, thank God it's not Starmer, to find some way of shutting down the case and are denigrating the PJ to try and salve their consciences.

by Eastree27 11.06.20 11:26

sharonl wrote:Allegedly, he has been moved to a cell of his own.

Why?

Afraid that he will speak to his cell mates?

Has he been promised an early release and a new identity in exchange for being a patsy?

Easier to bump off?

by Guest 11.06.20 11:29

Doug D wrote:Pat Brown blog from yesterday.

Moving away from ‘after 5.30 on the Thursday’ maybe?

‘I know many of you might say this means that Maddie was dead for many days. I still would think that is an unlikely scenario. It is far more likely that something would have only happened the day before and there was less than 24 hours to figure out what to do. The evening was still a mess and reeks of panic.’

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

I actually am of the opinion that something bad happened to Madeleine early in the week, Kate was sleeping in the kids room keeping an eye on her (they're Doctors!) and she died on Tuesday/Wednesday.

I do think there is something to the Mrs Fenn statement (I know others disagree).

Pat has a point about their story being a panicked mess. It was written on the colouring book cover - twice.

by Eastree27 11.06.20 11:32

Milo wrote:Verdi, a couple of reasons why lots of people can't see what you see ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]) IMHO

(a) they have not read the police files or Amaral's book or the statement analyses of Hyatt and McLish or watched Hall's series or read all of the postings to date in this forum or at least the threads of certain contributors or the books written by contributors (I could list them but would be afraid I left out a person of insight and significance) or... or... ; and (b) they don't have the insights into the way the minds of plotters and liars operate .. which might indicate that they are nice people who don't pick up on some of the McCann team's tactics, which is not to say that they are not genuine in their search for the truth.

I have spent thousands of hours obsessing over Madeleine's non-abduction since the day it was first reported and, in the September after the May non-abduction, innocently sprouting my theory to Colin Sutton during after-work drinks in a hotel in Addis Ababa.

The questions that continue to haunt me are:

1. Why did the UK government, SY, The Met, Lec. police, various other police, certain laboratories, MI5 etc. get involved and why did some of them have so much success in embedding the abduction scenario in people's minds?

2. How can the Tapas 7 remain loyal to each other and the McCanns, given the secret that they share? (There is only one couple to my knowledge who have separated since the event.)

3. How come people across the globe but particularly in the UK and Australia turn away from the scientific method, not just in the MM case but also in the Saint Greta of Climate Change scam, and Covid-19 (where nobodies in politics and nobodies in medicine argue with Nobel Prize winners in immunology and epidemiology)?

4.Why are so many journalists and so many commentators so stupid?

I hope I live long enough to have my Question 1 answered.

Thanks to all on this forum who turn their minds to this mystery, a mystery about the non-abduction of an English child in Portugal and a mystery about human nature, power and deviant behaviour.

Which couple have separated.

by kaz 11.06.20 12:18

Interesting theory from PB.
However if the girlfriend is telling the truth the '' horrible job '' would surely be the picking up of a blue bag from the villa's gardens.
No way was CB our Smithman.

by Batman 11.06.20 13:30

I appreciate that many on here have spent 1000s of hours on this case. But please don't let your frustration get the better of your good judgement.

CB could be part of the cover up, yes. But this is the German police we're talking about, not the Met.

For your conspiracy theory to hold true, we'd have to believe they are complicit in a British establishment cover-up. Really? On what basis have you drawn that conclusion?

I'd prefer to stick to the facts. And the reason I posted on a forum for the first time in 13 years is because I think this is the first piece of news that suggests it's not, and has never been, a cover-up.

Clear your minds for a moment. Wipe away the years of misinformation about burglars, kidnappers etc and envisage something quite different.

Imagine the PJ and the Met know exactly what happened, even if we just focus on one thing most agree on ie accidental death in 5a.

What crime has been committed? It's the concealment and disposal of a cadaver. And to bring a successful prosecution, the police have to be able to follow the evidence trail from 5a to the final resting place. There is some evidence around concealment - blue bag, dogs, church keys, mysterious visit to church in the middle of the night and hire car - but nothing in relation to disposal.

Every single one of the prime suspects to date, presented as burglars and kidnappers, could actually have been investigated for their potential role in the disposal. All it takes to believe that is to remove the police and newspaper narrative around the nature of the investigation ie that they weren't being investigated for bungled burglaries or kidnapping at all. And to believe that the McCs needed help.

I would welcome hearing from anyone with fact based evidence that undermines my perspective. But please dont respond saying this is nonsense, that I haven't read the files/theories for 13 years or that I'm not using a 'scientific approach' whatever that means. I'm actually on your side!

by Guest 11.06.20 13:55

In a criminal investigation, there are 4 questions that need to be addressed in this exact order:

1. WHAT HAPPENED?
2. HOW DID IT HAPPEN?
3. WHO DID IT?
4. WHY DID HE/SHE/THEY IT?

In the case of Madeleine McCann, we saw a lot of effort from the UK government to convince the Portuguese police that Madeleine had been the victim of an "abduction", without any evidence whatsoever. So they were starting with an assumption that she had been abducted, and looking for the boogeyman who did it, without establishing what happened and how it happened.

The German police is no different.

The German prosecutor said: "We are assuming that the girl is dead."

By assuming that she was kidnapped and then later murdered, the German police is not conducting a real investigation. Because in a real investigation, the crime scene is examined to establish "WHAT HAPPENED". As it stands, the crime scene was indeed thoroughly searched and examined by the Portuguese police and they found no evidence of an intruder/abductor.

If there is no evidence that Madeleine was abducted, no genuine police investigation can start with that assumption.

So, is the German police also involved in the cover-up? I don't know, but they surely aren't doing justice to Madeleine McCann by narrowing down the scope of their probe.

by Guest 11.06.20 14:01

Batman wrote:And the reason I posted on a forum for the first time in 13 years is...

Nah.

by Guest 11.06.20 14:16

MTSTAR wrote:
Verdi wrote:
For this reason, there is a need for a systematic approach to core policing functions to deal with the complexity. And it is vital to have a thorough, well documented investigation strategy.

Mmmm .... and that's why Operation Grange was established nine years ago - allegedly, am I right?

So, where are they now, a step back from where they started - chasing a German prisoner who clearly had no involvement with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

This is disgusting. I hope it's not costing the British taxpayer any more than already squandered - or the Portuguese public for that matter.
If I was a serial burglar, I don’t think I’d panic at the sight of a three year old in bed! I’d ignore the child, grab what I could and leave. There’s hardly going to be a photofit description coming is there? Sorry if this in the wrong place. It’s just been bugging me.

Time for some levity..

MIDNIGHT RAID New Madeleine McCann suspect ‘broke into British family’s holiday home wearing surgical mask and loomed over sleeping girl, 7, saying ‘I’m your daddy’

Detectives have discovered a creep carried out nearly 30 attacks in a 40-mile radius of Praia da Luz

Tracey Kandohla and Gerard Couzens

3 May 2019, 21:15Updated: 3 May 2019, 22:43

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
A SEX fiend who speaks English and wears a surgical mask is understood to be the kidnapper Portuguese police now fear may have snatched Madeleine McCann.

Netflix Madeleine McCann documentary.

I'm telling you, this latest extravaganza has got Netflix stamped all over it. The Netflix production is built on and around the team McCann storyline.

Are you my daddy?

Yes!

No you're not, you're smelly, wearing a mask and you talk funny

No I'm not and I don't!

Go away you silly man or I'll squeem and squeem ans squeem till I'm thick .... and I can tanty

by Batman 11.06.20 14:26

pauloalexandre wrote:In a criminal investigation, there are 4 questions that need to be addressed in this exact order:

1. WHAT HAPPENED?
2. HOW DID IT HAPPEN?
3. WHO DID IT?
4. WHY DID HE/SHE/THEY IT?

In the case of Madeleine McCann, we saw a lot of effort from the UK government to convince the Portuguese police that Madeleine had been the victim of an "abduction", without any evidence whatsoever. So they were starting with an assumption that she had been abducted, and looking for the boogeyman who did it, without establishing what happened and how it happened.

The German police is no different.

The German prosecutor said: "We are assuming that the girl is dead."

By assuming that she was kidnapped and then later murdered, the German police is not conducting a real investigation. Because in a real investigation, the crime scene is examined to establish "WHAT HAPPENED". As it stands, the crime scene was indeed thoroughly searched and examined by the Portuguese police and they found no evidence of an intruder/abductor.

If there is no evidence that Madeleine was abducted, no genuine police investigation can start with that assumption.

So, is the German police also involved in the cover-up? I don't know, but they surely aren't doing justice to Madeleine McCann by narrowing down the scope of their probe.

Can I ask how you know what was said by the Met to the PJ or the Germans? This is a police investigation and what is said between police forces is meant to be highly confidential.

Regarding the Grange ToR which does cite the abduction starting point, it wouldn't be the first time the uk police have deceived the nation in order to catch their man or woman. Alternatively, that may have been the starting point for a politically motivated cover up and the reason for that is no longer valid so Grange became a valid investigation.

It would be interesting to know whether the D notices have been lifted. That would suggest the disappearance is no longer a matter of national security.

by Guest 11.06.20 14:42

Batman wrote:Can I ask how you know what was said by the Met to the PJ or the Germans?

I was quoting the German prosecutor, from his press conference.

As for UK government agencies, it's been pretty much documented, in books such as "The Truth of the Lie", that they were highly involved in the case and their job, in my opinion, was to distract the PJ with false leads.

by cookiemuncher 11.06.20 15:54

pauloalexandre wrote:
Batman wrote:Can I ask how you know what was said by the Met to the PJ or the Germans?
I was quoting the German prosecutor, from his press conference.

As for UK government agencies, it's been pretty much documented, in books such as "The Truth of the Lie", that they were highly involved in the case and their job, in my opinion, was to distract the PJ with false leads.

I can remember going back a long time ago that Martin Grimes, Eddie and Keela's handler, said that he was met by officers from MI5 when he arrived back at the airport in the UK. I can't remember the exact details but why would MI5 be involved unless there was something underhand going on and they wanted to get to him first to "read him the riot act a.k.a keep your mouth shut" before other people did.

It could have been mentioned in GA's book, but my memory is very foggy these days, old age! duh

by Liz Eagles 11.06.20 16:19

Has anyone been charged with the abduction/murder of Madeleine McCann?

by Guest 11.06.20 16:22

Milo wrote:Verdi, a couple of reasons why lots of people can't see what you see ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]) IMHO

(a) they have not read the police files or Amaral's book or the statement analyses of Hyatt and McLish or watched Hall's series or read all of the postings to date in this forum or at least the threads of certain contributors or the books written by contributors (I could list them but would be afraid I left out a person of insight and significance) or... or... ; and (b) they don't have the insights into the way the minds of plotters and liars operate .. which might indicate that they are nice people who don't pick up on some of the McCann team's tactics, which is not to say that they are not genuine in their search for the truth.

Why of course Milo, when touching on the case of Madeleine McCann as a whole. However, my comments only related to the latest suspect - the German prisoner.

Just like the early days of Madeleine Mccann's disappearance, the blitz of coverage on this latest suspect changes drastically from one day to the next and from one newspaper to the next.

Why can't people see that? The story is utter nonsense from beginning to end and it's gaining momentum by the day in the tabloids. New witnesses coming out of the blue to testify against the suspect, properties and vehicles never before mentioned, lurking strangers and whatever else.

It's nothing short of risible.

Madeleine McCann was not abducted.

by Guest 11.06.20 16:29

Batman wrote:For a start, in the last sentence quoted above, no pedophile planning to snatch a child the next day is going to refer to it as an unpleasant task. But being required to dispose of her cadaver...that's a different matter.

It's a press report - The Sun to be precise. Notoriously inaccurate and most certainly very very pro McCann.

Batman wrote:This isn't about murder, it's about concealment and disposal of a cadaver and it's completely aligned with what most people on this forum believe, if they're open to the possibility that T2 needed help to dispose of the body.

In your opinion.

ETA: What's T2?

by cookiemuncher 11.06.20 16:34

Verdi wrote:
Milo wrote:Verdi, a couple of reasons why lots of people can't see what you see ([You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]) IMHO

(a) they have not read the police files or Amaral's book or the statement analyses of Hyatt and McLish or watched Hall's series or read all of the postings to date in this forum or at least the threads of certain contributors or the books written by contributors (I could list them but would be afraid I left out a person of insight and significance) or... or... ; and (b) they don't have the insights into the way the minds of plotters and liars operate .. which might indicate that they are nice people who don't pick up on some of the McCann team's tactics, which is not to say that they are not genuine in their search for the truth.

Why of course Milo, when touching on the case of Madeleine McCann as a whole. However, my comments only related to the latest suspect - the German prisoner.

Just like the early days of Madeleine Mccann's disappearance, the blitz of coverage on this latest suspect changes drastically from one day to the next and from one newspaper to the next.

Why can't people see that? The story is utter nonsense from beginning to end and it's gaining momentum by the day in the tabloids. New witnesses coming out of the blue to testify against the suspect, properties and vehicles never before mentioned, lurking strangers and whatever else.

It's nothing short of risible.

Madeleine McCann was not abducted.

It's also a disgusting affront to Madeleine's memory, she deserves better than this. Only her parents can put a stop to it.

How many people have made £thousands if not £millions from her "disappearance". Hang your heads in shame, all of you!!

by Batman 11.06.20 16:45

cookiemuncher wrote:
pauloalexandre wrote:
Batman wrote:Can I ask how you know what was said by the Met to the PJ or the Germans?
I was quoting the German prosecutor, from his press conference.

As for UK government agencies, it's been pretty much documented, in books such as "The Truth of the Lie", that they were highly involved in the case and their job, in my opinion, was to distract the PJ with false leads.
I can remember going back a long time ago that Martin Grimes, Eddie and Keela's handler, said that he was met by officers from MI5 when he arrived back at the airport in the UK. I can't remember the exact details but why would MI5 be involved unless there was something underhand going on and they wanted to get to him first to "read him the riot act a.k.a keep your mouth shut" before other people did.

It could have been mentioned in GA's book, but my memory is very foggy these days, old age!

All true. But the german prosecutor is part of the plan to catch the criminals and will say what he needs to say to get the job done.

And yes, MI5's involvement is supported by Amaral's book and the D notices. But that, in itself, only demonstrates that national interests were or are at stake. Nothing else.

So thank you for your responses, Paulo and cookiecruncher but these facts, which we all agree on, do not undermine the possibility that the true nature of the investigation may be different to the public version.

In any event, time will tell and if it turns out to be an EU-GB conspiracy, I will be just as disappointed as both of you.

by Guest 11.06.20 16:48

cookiemuncher wrote:
pauloalexandre wrote:
Batman wrote:Can I ask how you know what was said by the Met to the PJ or the Germans?
I was quoting the German prosecutor, from his press conference.

As for UK government agencies, it's been pretty much documented, in books such as "The Truth of the Lie", that they were highly involved in the case and their job, in my opinion, was to distract the PJ with false leads.
I can remember going back a long time ago that Martin Grimes, Eddie and Keela's handler, said that he was met by officers from MI5 when he arrived back at the airport in the UK. I can't remember the exact details but why would MI5 be involved unless there was something underhand going on and they wanted to get to him first to "read him the riot act a.k.a keep your mouth shut" before other people did.

It could have been mentioned in GA's book, but my memory is very foggy these days, old age!

I heard Gonçalo Amaral say that in an interview back in 2014, and it wasn't Martin Grime. It was Mark Harrison, who was one of the key people in bringing forward the cadaver and blood dogs.

You also had British profilers arriving at Praia da Luz, who were instrumental in naming Robert Murat as the most likely suspect of Madeleine's abduction (90% likelihood, so they said). Again, they were assuming that she had been abducted.

The German police is behaving in the same way - they are assuming that Madeleine was killed after having been abducted by a stranger, and are now looking for that "stranger".

That's not an investigation. It's a diversion tactic.

by Guest 11.06.20 16:57

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
We've all been there sad

What about me [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ?

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

And now me [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] cutthroat

What about us [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ?

Ooops sorry.... where did that come from ?

by cookiemuncher 11.06.20 17:17

Batman wrote:
cookiemuncher wrote:
pauloalexandre wrote:
Batman wrote:Can I ask how you know what was said by the Met to the PJ or the Germans?
I was quoting the German prosecutor, from his press conference.

As for UK government agencies, it's been pretty much documented, in books such as "The Truth of the Lie", that they were highly involved in the case and their job, in my opinion, was to distract the PJ with false leads.
I can remember going back a long time ago that Martin Grimes, Eddie and Keela's handler, said that he was met by officers from MI5 when he arrived back at the airport in the UK. I can't remember the exact details but why would MI5 be involved unless there was something underhand going on and they wanted to get to him first to "read him the riot act a.k.a keep your mouth shut" before other people did.

It could have been mentioned in GA's book, but my memory is very foggy these days, old age!

All true. But the german prosecutor is part of the plan to catch the criminals and will say what he needs to say to get the job done.

And yes, MI5's involvement is supported by Amaral's book and the D notices. But that, in itself, only demonstrates that national interests were or are at stake. Nothing else.

So thank you for your responses, Paulo and cookiecruncher but these facts, which we all agree on, do not undermine the possibility that the true nature of the investigation may be different to the public version.

In any event, time will tell and if it turns out to be an EU-GB conspiracy, I will be just as disappointed as both of you.

I've found this on the internet regarding Mark Harrison and Martin Grimes, MI5 and others -

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

It's worth a read.

by Guest 11.06.20 17:22

Batman wrote:So thank you for your responses, Paulo and cookiecruncher but these facts, which we all agree on, do not undermine the possibility that the true nature of the investigation may be different to the public version.

In any event, time will tell and if it turns out to be an EU-GB conspiracy, I will be just as disappointed as both of you.

A fact universally acknowledged by all level headed folk that have taken time to study and follow this case.

After 13 years of investigation, the case of missing Madeleine McCann has never been solved.

That is the key and the overiding evidence that the true circumstances behind the disappearance is the object of a very high level cover-up.

There is only one feasible reason for that cover-up that I can see. A worldwide atrocious scandal that tries so hard to reveal it's ugly head but the holes are plugged faster than they appear in public.

by cookiemuncher 11.06.20 17:26

cookiemuncher wrote:
Batman wrote:
cookiemuncher wrote:
pauloalexandre wrote:
Batman wrote:Can I ask how you know what was said by the Met to the PJ or the Germans?
I was quoting the German prosecutor, from his press conference.

As for UK government agencies, it's been pretty much documented, in books such as "The Truth of the Lie", that they were highly involved in the case and their job, in my opinion, was to distract the PJ with false leads.
I can remember going back a long time ago that Martin Grimes, Eddie and Keela's handler, said that he was met by officers from MI5 when he arrived back at the airport in the UK. I can't remember the exact details but why would MI5 be involved unless there was something underhand going on and they wanted to get to him first to "read him the riot act a.k.a keep your mouth shut" before other people did.

It could have been mentioned in GA's book, but my memory is very foggy these days, old age!

All true. But the german prosecutor is part of the plan to catch the criminals and will say what he needs to say to get the job done.

And yes, MI5's involvement is supported by Amaral's book and the D notices. But that, in itself, only demonstrates that national interests were or are at stake. Nothing else.

So thank you for your responses, Paulo and cookiecruncher but these facts, which we all agree on, do not undermine the possibility that the true nature of the investigation may be different to the public version.

In any event, time will tell and if it turns out to be an EU-GB conspiracy, I will be just as disappointed as both of you.
I've found this on the internet regarding Mark Harrison and Martin Grimes, MI5 and others -

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

It's worth a read.

I forgot to mention that it's a SOI Act from Tony Bennett. I'm still learning, I'm doing my best.

by nomendelta 11.06.20 17:26

pauloalexandre wrote:
cookiemuncher wrote:
pauloalexandre wrote:
Batman wrote:Can I ask how you know what was said by the Met to the PJ or the Germans?
I was quoting the German prosecutor, from his press conference.

As for UK government agencies, it's been pretty much documented, in books such as "The Truth of the Lie", that they were highly involved in the case and their job, in my opinion, was to distract the PJ with false leads.
I can remember going back a long time ago that Martin Grimes, Eddie and Keela's handler, said that he was met by officers from MI5 when he arrived back at the airport in the UK. I can't remember the exact details but why would MI5 be involved unless there was something underhand going on and they wanted to get to him first to "read him the riot act a.k.a keep your mouth shut" before other people did.

It could have been mentioned in GA's book, but my memory is very foggy these days, old age!
I heard Gonçalo Amaral say that in an interview back in 2014, and it wasn't Martin Grime. It was Mark Harrison, who was one of the key people in bringing forward the cadaver and blood dogs.

You also had British profilers arriving at Praia da Luz, who were instrumental in naming Robert Murat as the most likely suspect of Madeleine's abduction (90% likelihood, so they said). Again, they were assuming that she had been abducted.

The German police is behaving in the same way - they are assuming that Madeleine was killed after having been abducted by a stranger, and are now looking for that "stranger".

That's not an investigation. It's a diversion tactic.

But why would German police be investigating it in the first place? I just don't buy that yet another police force and government is involved in a conspiracy to frame someone. Whether this guy was the disposal guy or was fully guilty of abduction and murder, I think the German police have followed "intelligence" leading them to this guy. They weren't investigating an abduction, they were investigating infromation that points to CB being responsible.

Nothing about this case makes sense so I am not willing to rule anything out. When you look at the information we have access to then it paints a very clear picture that the parents were involved in some way but the actions - everyone colluding, external people colluding, the parents big beaming faces - it doesn't ring true no matter how Maddie "disappeared". This is yet another fascinating chapter and I am waiting to see how it unfolds.

by Batman 11.06.20 17:31

Verdi wrote:
Batman wrote:For a start, in the last sentence quoted above, no pedophile planning to snatch a child the next day is going to refer to it as an unpleasant task. But being required to dispose of her cadaver...that's a different matter.

It's a press report - The Sun to be precise. Notoriously inaccurate and most certainly very very pro McCann.

Batman wrote:This isn't about murder, it's about concealment and disposal of a cadaver and it's completely aligned with what most people on this forum believe, if they're open to the possibility that T2 needed help to dispose of the body.

In your opinion.

ETA: What's T2?

Ah, thank you Verdi. I know you're a formidable force on this forum and you've experienced the whole gamut of imposters posing as supporters and then turning out to be pro mccs. So I do understand any reluctance to engage. And I thank you for actually doing so.

Your first point is well made. But this quote, if it is indeed false, isn't pro mcc. And that's why I find it strange to be reading it in the sun. I'm not the only one to think it speaks to CB's involvement in disposing of a cadaver and, if that's what it suggests, it's very much anti mcc.

I haven't discounted your take on it at all. I'm just saying I find it encouraging to read such a damning quote published in the sun of all places.

And to your second point. If you're saying that it's my opinion that the investigation is focused on concealment and disposal, yes, that's absolutely correct. And I've presented the reasons why I think that.

Maybe it was presumptive to say that my interpretation of recent events aligns with the beliefs of many on this forum. What I meant was that nothing i have said is inconsistent with accidental death in 5a, dogs evidence in 5a and car, church keys/door, blue bag, fridge and GM comments on finding the body. I think these are key points of agreement on this forum that point the finger of suspicion at the mccs.

And finally, T2 is the mccs.

I hope that makes sense. I won't promote my perspective any more as I have no wish to upset people or derail the amazing work you and many others have done to date. But I hope I'm allowed to defend it in the way that I have here?

by **Jill Havern** 11.06.20 18:19

Batman wrote:I won't promote my perspective any more as I have no wish to upset people or derail the amazing work you and many others have done to date. But I hope I'm allowed to defend it in the way that I have here?

All of us are entitled to our opinions of course, and can present theories on the forum, preferably backed up with sources, links, evidence etc...if not, then any of us should be prepared to be challenged.

Verdi is not trying to deter you from posting - the forum needs to try to keep to facts, evidence etc where possible, and opinions should be seen as such.

Keep Calm and Carry on!

by Queryquery 11.06.20 18:27

sharonl wrote:Is this the old barn or farmhouse that these reports are relating to?

Blood on towel may be from Madeleine

Sunday Express
By Matt Drake in Praia da Luz and James Murray
2 December 2007

THE hunt for Madeleine McCann was last night centred on a disused barn near Praia da Luz, where police found a towel possibly stained with the fouryear-old's blood.

Fibres found on the towel allegedly match fibres from the hire car rented by Maddie's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann.

Portuguese detectives discussed the breakthrough when they met police and a Crown Prosecution Service official last week in Leicester.

Today, for the first time, the Sunday Express can shed light on the new avenue police are pursuing in the hope of a breakthrough in the baffling case.

Based on fresh information from a mobile phone surveillance, police began a search of an area in the south east of the resort.

They came across a towel, with an Aztec design, by a disused barn in a remote area near Praia da Luz.

Portuguese sources say forensic scientists used a substance called luminol to look for blood deposits and found three sites on the edges of the towel.

From the sites they tested the blood deposits to see if there was a match with Madeleine McCann's DNA.

Although the samples were not good quality the scientists were able to do what is called low copy analysis which showed there was "moderate" support to suggest the deposits matched Madeleine's blood.

The results were not conclusive and are not regarded as being strong enough to be presented as evidence in any court case.

But close analysis of the towel revealed fibres which were not made of the towel material.

The fibre fragments were microscopically examined against fibres found in the boot of the Renault Scenic car hired by the McCanns 25 days after Maddie vanished.

Portuguese police sources say there was "strong support" that the fibres found on the towel matched fibres from the boot of the car.

One possibility being considered by the Portuguese detectives was that the towel had at some point been in the boot of the Renault Scenic car, which would explain how fibres had got on it.

Meanwhile, a close friend of Kate and Gerry McCann who was holidaying with them when Madeleine vanished will be questioned by Portuguese police this week over a "mystery' phone call.

Dr Russell O'Brien, 36, has come under investigation after a team of telephone surveillance officers highlighted a mobile call made to the missing four-year-old's father more than a month after she disappeared.

Portuguese detectives are now working on the theory that a call made between Gerry McCann, 39, and Dr O'Brien is the missing link that could help them find Madeleine's body.

Investigators are focussing their inquiry on the exact whereabouts of Dr O'Brien when the call was made on June 10.

Gerry McCann said the call was made within four kilometres of the Mark Warner resort.

But technicians have now dismissed his claim after examining data records taken from specified areas near to where the child went missing.

It is understood key words aroused police suspicions.

Was this reported elsewhere

Latest topics