BRICK Reviews

My thoughts on Bernt Stellander’s The Sudden Impulse:
There are other people better placed to analyse the analysis in the book than myself. Peter McLeod (retired police superintendent) for one, who is not only well qualified to do this, but has already thoroughly scrutinised The Sudden Impulse for the rest of us. His review is well worth a read along with his own impressive free ebook, available on the Jill Havern Forum.
My review is more from the perspective of the experience of reading the book:
I found it an enjoyable, emotive & immersive read. I believe this is regardless of my interest in the Madeleine McCann case. However, as I have been following the case quite closely, I appreciated that the book is fact and evidence based. English is not Stellander’s first language, so the command he has of it & his ability to write in such a colourful, entertaining & humorous style is impressive. So here are some of my observations:

1. His main objective is not to shame anyone or have the McCanns dragged out to be publicly punished. His wishes are for those concerned, to love Madeleine enough to allow her to be brought home to her family and to have a respectful burial. He genuinely believes Kate wants this for her daughter too. He also wishes for the dark cloud that has been left over Praia de Luz to be lifted. He wants for everyone, I think maybe Kate above all, to be freed by the truth.

2. The book is more than just an interesting read. There is the promise of some follow up material regarding his work in Part#2. I think he is a creative guy, so who knows what else he may have in store for us but I do get the impression that this book is part of a package that is yet to unfold. Time will tell...

3. He goes to a lot of trouble to ascertain the “when” of it all. This allows for a more focussed narrative thereafter.

4. The Tapas9 statements did not hang together, neither within their own statement nor with respect to the statements of the rest of the group. Individually they were almost totally incoherent (he calls David Payne's statement err soup). These statements were forever changing to keep up with police findings, even in key aspects. What Stellander sets out to do as the opening chapter of his book, is to explore all the combinations of the versions of the statements for each of the key players with regards to the checking system on May 3. He painstakingly shows how the route of each of these combinations leads to only one conclusion - that there was no abduction. I imagine this would have been a laborious task to carry out & to subsequently document. Maybe this is why no one has done this before. It shows bravery on his part to strive to expose those statements for what they are with such scrutiny. To then put all his findings into a book, knowing what a potentially tedious read this could be, shows dedication to get the truth out there. However, he doesn’t then simply rely on the reader's interest in the case to motivate them to wade through all the details. Instead, he takes it upon himself to convey his findings in as captivating a manner as I think is possible. He is right beside you as you read, encouraging you in a variety of ways to continue. He ends one of his analyses, the one involving the whooshing curtains, with the amusing conclusion - “Physics left the apartment that night, not Maddie”

5. The narrative is repetitive in places, but I believe it needs to be. Some things need to be repeated to really drive home what happened because it’s so crazy, like Maddie crying all alone for 75 minutes on a family holiday. Or to drive home what did not happen, because that’s crazy too. Like invisible Jane in her flapping flip flops who saw a non-existent abductor. He manages to make the repetition humorous, like those jokes that get funnier when they are repeated, or like jokes that are funny because they are repeated. The repetition also ensures the reader doesn’t have to go back and find all the relevant details to the aspect he is currently conveying.

6. He pulls no punches when describing what is the likeliest thing that happened to Madeleine. He is brutal in these descriptions. He has to be, because it is a brutal scenario and we should rightly, be woken up to it. It leaves nowhere for those involved to hide. I am refraining from putting an example here because to hear these descriptions you have to have journeyed through the book. It’s the love & compassion he clearly has for Madeleine as he writes these graphic descriptions, that make his words acceptable. Few could pull that off. The brutal reality of what likely happened to her needs to be conveyed, so people can’t just sweep that to one side and sound really caring by sympathising with her parents. After all, it is only possible to grant the McCanns the victimhood they have worked so hard for, if Madeleine’s suffering can be blurred out a little. The focus needs to be returned to Madeleine where it belongs, and Stellander never loses sight of this.

7. This book takes you through the emotional & nerve-racking experience of hiding a body & staging an abduction. It describes how specific moments may have felt. Moments such as Kate faking the crèche records with the knowledge that her entry would be scrutinised after the staged abduction that would take place later that night, or how that day might have felt for individuals who knew they were going to have to give the performance of their lives in a few hours.

8. He has not shied away from addressing what the reasons could be behind a cover up of this scale or why it could be that the McCanns have clearly been given protection at all costs. Including the cost of risking damage to Scotland Yard's formidable worldwide reputation. He makes no assumptions, he simply shares the facts he is aware of & invites you to draw your own conclusions.

9. He has undertaken some serious & creative research of his own including stake outs, hidden field cameras & physically digging. All of which brings intrigue as we wonder what is to come.

10. He has striven to work with key people & key organisations, including the Portuguese police & authorities.

11. His book is not a black & white fairytale of good vs evil. It’s a realistic & spiritual look at the good & the bad in all of us. How none of us really know what we might do at a pivotal point in our lives. How we can make a poor life choice & before we know it we have reached what may seem like a point of no return. He shows a lot of compassion, however, he makes it very clear that he does draw a line when it comes to sexual abuse.

12. He lays out exactly what he believes some of the characters in this case are guilty of, in both legal & ethical terms. He tells them this by speaking to them directly through the pages of his book. It is unlikely they will have been spoken to this directly before. He encourages them to take their heads out of the sand to look directly at what they have done & what they ended up being a part of. How they respond will be a true measure of their character.

If you choose to purchase and read the book, I imagine you will enjoy it. Certainly you are likely to enjoy the forthcoming videos & snaps all the more for having read how he went about obtaining this footage.
Hema Patel
Friday 12th May 2024

I don't enjoy sympathy for Kate McCann. I don't know how anybody could feel sorry for someone who could have - and still can  - 'shout the truth from the roof tops'.  Unless she was being blackmailed with a threat to the twins, of course.

Thank you for sharing that, pablowski.

I think PeterMac was posting someone else's review of the book?

Peter MacLeod is our own PeterMac and he has posted further upthread his own opinion.

pablowski wrote:PeterMac,

Thank you for your thoughts. I completed the book last week. It is a big brick.

Bernt has spent a lot of time and effort to review the case. This was/is a huge task. Yes, there is repetition and the English is a wee bit clumsy at times – but for a non-native speaker [without high quality proofing/editing] it is very impressive. 


He talks directly to us the readers and to the Tapas group members. Yes, he has sympathy for some of the Tapas 9 though balanced with antipathy based on alleged lies, deceit and blame-shifting.


I have not read Peter McLeod’s assessment. Though I feel what this book needs is a major summarization with clear signposting of facts/bases for assumptions. It will, I hope, be reviewed and edited with a view to producing a video documentary clearly giving us Bernt’s view of the sudden impulse.


This book - in it’s current format – is a wonderful document for people who have a strong knowledge/keen interest in the McCann case. It might be a difficult read for newbies.


And I think it is excellent that he acknowledges the great work done by Richard D Hall. Richard seems to have taken a big step back from the Madeleine McCann case in recent times. I don’t know why, but whatever the reason, I would welcome his views.


The ‘Sudden Impulse’ does not attempt to answer every question. For me, I do not have a clear explanation for the reasons behind the high level political [intelligence/police] support for the McCann’s from day 1, why UK police focus only on abduction [it cannot solely be to save face] and why there has been zero mainstream UK media discussion of Bernt’s book.


And - slightly off-topic –  I have always wondered why Sandra Felguerias changed her mind. I hope she reads the book.

When did Sandra Felguerias change her mind? What does she think now?

Sandra has only one thing on her mind: to make it big in sensationalist journalism. She got her 15' thanks to GMC's quip, "ask the dogs, Sandra". When she tried in every way to incriminate CB, posing as an investigative journalist, she showed who she was.

AnneCGuedes wrote:Sandra has only one thing on her mind: to make it big in sensationalist journalism. She got her 15' thanks to GMC's quip, "ask the dogs, Sandra". When she tried in every way to incriminate CB, posing as an investigative journalist, she showed who she was.

And she did it so well with lashings of lip gloss.

AnneCGuedes wrote:Sandra has only one thing on her mind: to make it big in sensationalist journalism. She got her 15' thanks to GMC's quip, "ask the dogs, Sandra". When she tried in every way to incriminate CB, posing as an investigative journalist, she showed who she was.

I didn't realise. That is very disappointing

Look on the other thread.  SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE is seriously worried about the Brick, and has already told Jill to take down the whole blog site,

Who could possibly be worried about a paperback book written by a disabled Norwegian golf club designer who did a bit of National Service in the Middle East a long time ago. . . 
and who admits in the Brick that he knew little if anything at all about the investigation or the case until a few years ago ??
Well SOMEONE, or SOME-more than ONE, obviously.
Who is identified in the book ?
The parents
The Tapas 7 - but only JT, ROB and DP and MO to any extent
The Nuggets
That makes EIGHT.
Captain, Renault's “Usual Suspects” in fact.

Who has most to lose ?
Same people, in the same order
But the Nuggets are the most recently compromised

Chucked under the proverbial bus?

I'm sure you are not going to die under the proverbial bus, Jill. You seem to made of sterner stuff than that! Hopefully, TFD has got, whoever it is, very rattled. And they are "running scared".

Honesty wrote:I'm sure you are not going to die under the proverbial bus, Jill. You seem to made of sterner stuff than that! Hopefully, TFD has got, whoever it is, very rattled. And they are "running scared".

I didn't mean me...I meant the Nuggets 

Someone is going under the bus for sure.

The first one or two who 'break ranks' can turn "King's Evidence" and beg for a mitigation of sentence  on the grounds of duress.
The ones who stick with the "official story" are doomed as liars as well as conspirators.

Who will rock the boat first? Not Gerry McCann,  imo.

Blink first, Kate.

Come and join us.

PeterMac wrote:The first one or two who 'break ranks' can turn "King's Evidence" and beg for a mitigation of sentence  on the grounds of duress.
The ones who stick with the "official story" are doomed as liars as well as conspirators.

Who are they going to break ranks to?

Uk police?.....they know.

Uk Government? ...they know

Uk media.....they know

Bernt Stellander?.....he knows

Portugese police?......they know

Portugese Authorities?.....they know

You get the idea..    

Im not sure its down to one person to make this decision is it?   Surely there are too many people involved to allow one person to bring the tower down?

If one of the key "witnesses" gives in then it's over.

Just one. And I think the PJ are one of many people they could go to.

A whistle blower would need a solicitor first, I imagine. It's doubtful anybody would want to take him/her on, given the amount of interference from ex prime ministers who wielded a lot of influence in the case. Spilling the beans with no legal back-up is asking for trouble, imo.

A brave solicitor

We know of a brave solicitor, a very brave solicitor: Mr Tony Bennett. Not that anyone could expect him to put himself in that position.

Yes, he  did his bit, at the beginning, and it cost him dearly.

Cake Lover wrote:Yes, he  did his bit, at the beginning, and it cost him dearly.

Maybe he can get it back if and when the brick makes them crack?

the more I think about this, the more I cant see anyone cracking.  If they think their life is intolerable now, they aint seen nothing yet.

All the Tapas lot, all the helpers, nuggets, P.M.s, officials, police chiefs etc. will be negatively affected by the big reveal.   Jobs will be lost, reputations will be in the gutter and friends and family will be forever estranged.

  Can you imagine the wrath of all those people who, so far have been coping, but will have their lives changed beyond recognition?

The whistle blower will receive more anger than they knew was possible.
Their life will be much, much worse than it is now.   They have to keep quiet.....pact of silence.....  Theyre all tied together, unable to move.

The only 2 ways I can see this coming out is by a deathbed confession
where the whistle blower wont have to face the consequences of losing all their friends, or for physical evidence to be found.  

We need the quantum physical remote scanning dna tracer machine back.

Bluebagthepirate wrote:

Cake Lover wrote:Yes, he  did his bit, at the beginning, and it cost him dearly.

Maybe he can get it back if and when the brick makes them crack?

That would be fabulous karma, wouldn't it?

Paddingtom wrote:
We need the quantum physical remote scanning dna tracer machine back.

Didn't Bernt say in 'the Brick' that he's in contact with Danie Krugel...?