McCanns Easter break Donegal 2007

You can see the name McCanns on the pub. I would guess that it was at one time owned by someone called McCann (remember it's a very common name in Ireland) and that has led to the myth that it was Gerry's parents.

I'm at a loss though to think of a reason for the McCanns to keep the story going.

The pub certainly doesn't appear to have been in use for years.

pauline wrote:Daisy, I checked out your link to Bren's website and those interviews. The first one on Chanel 4, at some point in November 2010, is interesting.

Gerry says 'the Fund is very accountable.'

reality - no financial info on website and minimum legal info filed at companies House.

gerry 'the vast majority of the money is spent on search fees'

reality - the detail that was provided in the 2008 accounts show that was not the case. we have no detail for 2009 and 2010 but the directors report refers to paying the legal costs of the Amaral case. Director John Mccann said in a video in 2007 that it is anticipated that most of the funds will go on legal expenses.

Gerry - 'we have a very experienced Fund Administrator'

reality - not sign of the item salary in the 2008 accounts where details given.
2010 accounts says in a note - Employees Nil (2009 None)

gerry ' we now have a part-time co-ordinator '(of awareness campaigns)

Reality - but the accounts say there are no staff!

If these positions are unpaid (unlikely) why is there so much need for funds. The interview was mainly about them needing money.

Funnily enough the Irish interview was mainly about their low funds too.

Putting the myth and reality together like that Pauline just shows what a big fat scam it all is. Will this couple (& their team) ever be held accountable for anything?

russiandoll wrote:apart from the photo of him being carried off the plane by Gerry on arrival back in UK, are there any other photos of Sean from the holiday? He was not on the pool photo for some reason. He looks so big compared to Amelie, maybe she was on the petite side...very petite !

I think that Russian Doll might have meant photos of him taken before Madeleine "disappeared". As has been said somewhere else there are suspiciously few photos and those that exist are of doubtful authenticity. The only ones where Sean appears are in the mobile phone footage and the playground photo with Gerry and Madeleine (if it is her).

Moa wrote:

tigger wrote:
I'm not happy about the way her head sits on her neck, her face should be more to her left. Behind her hair, there is an unconnected bit of cloth from Amelie's jacket visible. That is also quite puzzling.
Amelie is scrunched up under her cousin's arm and has her eyes closed, but everybody else, except Maddie, is looking at the camera. Maddie, just like the poolside photo, is again not part of the whole. Same with the ice cream photo which I couldn't blow up much.
The point is, I always check the whole photo, other hands, other necks etc. It's always Maddie who's been changed.
Her face, in that photograph, is very like the one by the pool.

I think what you see behind her ear is Fionas jumper, not a bit from Amelies jacket?
I acually think this is a genuin photo. I agree some of the PDL photos look not genuin, but this one does.
If you blow up there are lots of details there wich would be ery hard to do in photoshop, and I dont think who ever faked the PDL photos where that GOOD.
I think Sean looks almost as tall as her because where he sits the stone might go up a little. If you look at the feet, you can see that Madeleines feet are longer. And Amelie looks smaller because her cousin laying on her head pushing her down.
When I look at the whole of this picture I think it (surprisinly enough) that it is genuin. I
I dont think her hand look weird either when you blow it up. It is just the way shes holding it making it look weird.
WHEN the picture is taken, well thats a different question.
Anyone know or able to find out what the weather was like in Donegal the same periode as they where supposed to be there?`And this photo was taken?
PS I dont think it is proved to be airline tickets yet? It could also be the lugage ticket, it was discused on another tread here a few days ago...

Moa, the picture was taken pre 11/5/07, as is now established.
Amelie is smaller than Sean, quite a lot in fact.
Sean is not sitting on a higher stone than the others.
Maddie is holding something in her hand which is pink, probably plastic, but it's her wrist area which isn't right.
The scrap of fabric visible under her hair is clearly to do with Amelie, same colours and stripes as Amelie's jacket.
Maddie's lower leg is hardly any longer than that of Amelie. I still think the problem is one of proportion and not time.
I didn't say the airline tickets were proof, they are either boarding passes (more likely) or luggage tags, less likely, as these are usually removed for the next journey.

This picture was made available by whom? I detect the script that Aunty Phil used when talking about Maddie. This must have been sent to the Belfast Telegraph pretty quickly, together with the Irish legends re the pub and the family ties, plus of course, the collecting box.

tigger wrote:

Moa wrote:

tigger wrote:
I'm not happy about the way her head sits on her neck, her face should be more to her left. Behind her hair, there is an unconnected bit of cloth from Amelie's jacket visible. That is also quite puzzling.
Amelie is scrunched up under her cousin's arm and has her eyes closed, but everybody else, except Maddie, is looking at the camera. Maddie, just like the poolside photo, is again not part of the whole. Same with the ice cream photo which I couldn't blow up much.
The point is, I always check the whole photo, other hands, other necks etc. It's always Maddie who's been changed.
Her face, in that photograph, is very like the one by the pool.

I think what you see behind her ear is Fionas jumper, not a bit from Amelies jacket?
I acually think this is a genuin photo. I agree some of the PDL photos look not genuin, but this one does.
If you blow up there are lots of details there wich would be ery hard to do in photoshop, and I dont think who ever faked the PDL photos where that GOOD.
I think Sean looks almost as tall as her because where he sits the stone might go up a little. If you look at the feet, you can see that Madeleines feet are longer. And Amelie looks smaller because her cousin laying on her head pushing her down.
When I look at the whole of this picture I think it (surprisinly enough) that it is genuin. I
I dont think her hand look weird either when you blow it up. It is just the way shes holding it making it look weird.
WHEN the picture is taken, well thats a different question.
Anyone know or able to find out what the weather was like in Donegal the same periode as they where supposed to be there?`And this photo was taken?
PS I dont think it is proved to be airline tickets yet? It could also be the lugage ticket, it was discused on another tread here a few days ago...

Moa, the picture was taken pre 11/5/07, as is now established.
Amelie is smaller than Sean, quite a lot in fact.
Sean is not sitting on a higher stone than the others.
Maddie is holding something in her hand which is pink, probably plastic, but it's her wrist area which isn't right.
The scrap of fabric visible under her hair is clearly to do with Amelie, same colours and stripes as Amelie's jacket.
Maddie's lower leg is hardly any longer than that of Amelie. I still think the problem is one of proportion and not time.
I didn't say the airline tickets were proof, they are either boarding passes (more likely) or luggage tags, less likely, as these are usually removed for the next journey.

This picture was made available by whom? I detect the script that Aunty Phil used when talking about Maddie. This must have been sent to the Belfast Telegraph pretty quickly, together with the Irish legends re the pub and the family ties, plus of course, the collecting box.

Im sorry Tigger, I tried really hard , but I still don't see what you see in this picture..I don't see any pink in her hand, and I think the wrist looks weird because shes bending her tumb.. Where Im from we never remove the luggages tags ... I dont see amelies jacket behind her ear either? You might make a photo where you point out what you see?
For me this photo acually look genuin, if you look at the hair strings , thats not something thats easy to do in photoshop, I think this particular picture is genuin..

the case it self is not genuin I believe. The cover up seem to go high up in the system.. It has to for them to get away with the story, there are to many suspect things in this case, and it is realy weird that the goverment/ police has not done anything to solve it or question them..

Last night I re read and old magasine from last year. I saw an article about Prince Andrew. He was visiting on of his good friends in New York, and this friend was a pedophil. He had been in jail and settle an agreement with 16 girls under 14 years old!!
So tough it is not related to this case, it gave me something to think about. Prince Andrew clearly knew that his friend was convicted and spent time in jail for molesting children. This friend is also on the list for sexoffenders in USA...
I just hope this is not normal for people high up in the system in England, having friends like that...It shocked me..

Hi, I managed to transfer the photo to my Iphoto - still convinced, the whole picture works fine as long as Maddie isn't in it.
Definitely her head is 'floating' and now I've noticed that there is definite blurring near her left face. In fact, the top of her left ear is visible, but nothing else, the line of her face at the top isn't right either. Maddie had rather sticking out ears, her left ear should have been visible.
I said she is almost the same size as Amelie, but in fact the body is pretty nearly the same size as Sean, who is a couple of inches taller than Amelie.

The wrist and hand area can be easily explained if it needed to be adjusted, not easy to do, it's very blurred. I do a lot of figurative work, faces, bodies, life drawing, so I have a very critical eye.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] . This is an example how the eye is confused by relative sizing. I really think I've cracked it, those clothes too are not seen on any other photographs, I think.
Other point is, what other child would be around 2 to 2.5 years old at the time and connected to the Donegal family?

tigger wrote:Hi, I managed to transfer the photo to my Iphoto - still convinced, the whole picture works fine as long as Maddie isn't in it.
Definitely her head is 'floating' and now I've noticed that there is definite blurring near her left face. In fact, the top of her left ear is visible, but nothing else, the line of her face at the top isn't right either. Maddie had rather sticking out ears, her left ear should have been visible.
I said she is almost the same size as Amelie, but in fact the body is pretty nearly the same size as Sean, who is a couple of inches taller than Amelie.

The wrist and hand area can be easily explained if it needed to be adjusted, not easy to do, it's very blurred. I do a lot of figurative work, faces, bodies, life drawing, so I have a very critical eye.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] . This is an example how the eye is confused by relative sizing. I really think I've cracked it, those clothes too are not seen on any other photographs, I think.
Other point is, what other child would be around 2 to 2.5 years old at the time and connected to the Donegal family?

Well there is other pictures of her with that jacket on, maybe the other Donegal photos is where I saw it.
Are we looking at the same picture? Because I truly do not see what you see, and I also have worked with photoshop and feel I have a critical eye..Well guess we have do agree to disagree on that picture then

I have tried to copy and paste [ but not with success!] some photos taken of Sean and Amelie with their parents in the aftermath of their sister's disappearance and although they are not near one another they seem closer in size than that photo on the rocks. Maybe looking at a photo for too long makes you see things not as they are....

[quote="tigger"][quote="TheTruthWillOut"][You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Unless I've lost track, the photo in question is the third one here rather than the ice-cream one (not shown here) where Madeleine (?) is sitting bolt upright in a very unnatural pose for a child. To me, this one looks on the surface to be "normal" but then again I don't think that anything in this case merits that description! As mentioned before the cousins in the photo look older than they do a year later in the bottom photo.

photos of the twins in Portugal post M's disappearance are in a section here titled " how could they ?" Amelie still shorter than her brother but not as marked as only a short while previously on the Ireland trip....and I know its not close up but Sean looks slimmer and more baby ish here than the Donegal rock photo.

@ Moa: Exactly, why would you need that kind of "friends" for?

But paedophilia is strongly connected to this case. Not for the "abduction" itself but because the McCanns started to shout paedophile ring abduction from the very beginning, where there was no sighn of abduction let alone peadophiles. It would have not been the first thing jumping in my mind for sure.
And then the Gaspar Statements and Yvonne Martin who seemed to recognised David Payne regarding child abuse. It gives me the creeps to have to think what was going on in this circle of friends and I can imagine that the body of Madeleine had to disappear to avoid authopsy afther she (IMO accidentally) died.
And then the interference of Gordon Brown, a known freemason, and as we may believe the rumours, a child abuser. Same story of child abuse is doing the rounds about Tony Blair.
Not only in Britain there are more known child abusers in high (governmental) places but also in the Netherlands such stories are doing the rounds:

Ex BVD'er reveals cover up strategy

27/09/2011

"The domestic intelligence service has deliberately not performed several investigations into corruption within the government. That says Paul Herrie former employee of the BVD," The Press writes. One of the things that Herrie mentions a possible pedophile network where high judicial officials would be involved. "'When we met in studies for evidence of corruption within the government, the pit got covered," says Herrie.

From the report of Micha Kat, a Dutch investigative journalist:

Both
the ecclesiastical and judicial pedo-networks consist of people who think they are or were
socially invulnerable as they enjoyed the
coverage of organizations with unlimited power who are prepared to use
resources to prevent reputation damages. Organizations which also run a 'holy mission' serving God and serving Lady Justice. The members of these missions feel sanctified and morally invulnerable: Who serves God or the law, can afford more which than a baker or a bicycle maker?

From
these positions of social and moral 'invulnerability' circles
of pedophiles developed who have abused children which have a striking parallel: Both organizations have systems that enables them to get their
own children "on delivery". The Catholic Church owns its boarding schools and holiday camps, Justice its own foster homes and her Justice placements. The
private address of Joris Demmink was on the list of addresses of the 'childcare register ot The Hague " where the children could be send if they could no longer stay with with their natural parents.

This
report describes the facts and circumstances surrounding a network of
senior Dutch pedophiles with a hard core group of top people within
Justice. Joris Demmink plays a central role in this report. As
Secretary-General of the Ministry of Justice, he is one of the most
powerful people in the Netherlands and on him rests a tremendous
responsibility in the crucial areas of law enforcement, investigation
and prosecution. In many ways, the dominance of Demmink in The Hague can be compared with that of the Pope in Rome. But
just as the Pope has abused his position to protect the church Joris Demmink used his power not for the benefit of the collective, but to protect a criminal elite
group. One difference though, of Demmink it is fixed that he abuses children himself. From the pope it was never determined.

Nasty shit !!

Sorry if the following site has been mentioned in this thread previously but I found it interesting to see that the author feels exactly the same as us re the Donegal trip.

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

Thanks for that Fossilfuel. As far as I know, this site is the first to point out that the images of the two cousins in the Donegal photos are extremely starnge too. They look older than they did a year later!

Fossilfuel wrote:Sorry if the following site has been mentioned in this thread previously but I found it interesting to see that the author feels exactly the same as us re the Donegal trip.

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

Thanks, I don't believe it has been mentioned and it certainly fits this
thread. Good collection of relevant pics to compare there too.

What I don't get about the Donegal holiday is: if there were so many "extended family & close
friends" gathered at that Easter break (also the anniversary &
annual pilgrimage of Gerry's father John's death, according to Joe Peoples that is) why
isn't there more photographic evidence? Such a massive gathering and no
shots of Madeleine (or her siblings) with anyone else apart from the same two cousins as always: Fiona & Gregor. Where's the pictures of Madeleine with the rest of the family! THREE generations gathered? Granny, Aunts, Uncles, Brothers, Sisters, Cousins, etc.. Yet only 3 photos of Madeleine (with same cousins as always). Surely, if this holiday really took place (like they say) there would be LOADS of photos? If these photos exist they are some of the last ones taken of Madeleine before she disappeared; they are vital!

I'm very fortunate to belong to a large and loving family. If 46/27 (3 generations) of us decided to visit our homeland (also Ireland) it would be extraordinary! a big event, worthy of many many photographs.

I may start an appeal for the McCanns to release these photos, they are very important, they may even be the key to helping the public find Madeleine. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] *sarcasm*

in the pic with the five kids together(on the rocks, not the icecream pic) is it my eyes or does Madeleine look like she's either pulling her thumb backwards as if to be double jointed or does she have an extra thumb??? OR a pink /flesh coloured bangle or something ??

Upsy Daisy wrote:in the pic with the five kids together(on the rocks, not the icecream pic) is it my eyes or does Madeleine look like she's either pulling her thumb backwards as if to be double jointed or does she have an extra thumb??? OR a pink /flesh coloured bangle or something ??

The link to the photo that Marian supplied is high resolution so by blowing it up you can see the right hand is weird. She may be holding a pink plastic thing, but actually the wrist area is enormously wide and all wrong.I think the whole right side of her body is 'adjusted'. Her left ear is painted out, leaving just the tip visible, her head again, like the Everton shirt photo, isn't quite in the right position on the neck. the more you blow it up, the more the face 'floats' . I've said that the problem we have with the size of the twins there isn't the twins, but the fact that the girl in the middle is about the same size as Sean. It's not Sean who's too big, it's Maddie who's too small. I think it's a face paste again. Not the only one by a long chalk.

I see what you mean, it is almost as if it should be Madeleine and Sean who are the twins and not Amelie, since she looks so small. Also Madeleine's head sort of appears as if it has just been plonked on there, a bit like the pool photo expression/smile looking away from the camera and disjointed from the others. Very bizarre indeed.

Fossilfuel wrote:Sorry if the following site has been mentioned in this thread previously but I found it interesting to see that the author feels exactly the same as us re the Donegal trip.

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

But the picture was printet in a news paper early may 2007 its proven, I think on this tread a few pages back. Therfor the picture can not been taken in 2008 as statet on this site...

I was looking at other photos of Madeleine and I can't help but notice that her hands do often look quite stumpy, especially the fingers, in some pictures. So either she had some disorder or perhaps just bad photoshopping in sausage like fingers. Very odd. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Was it Gerry that is quoted as saying "Confusion is good"?

If it was, he was damn right.............

But I will say that at least the "Last" photo is manipulated (The sunglasses reflection) which then brings into question all other photo's.

Question is, was the manipulation of the "last" photo to hide something or to get everyone's attention on the photo's?

Moa wrote:

Fossilfuel wrote:Sorry if the following site has been mentioned in this thread previously but I found it interesting to see that the author feels exactly the same as us re the Donegal trip.

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

But the picture was printet in a news paper early may 2007 its proven, I think on this tread a few pages back. Therfor the picture can not been taken in 2008 as statet on this site...

This date was corrected in the later posts. The confusion arose because it was also printed by the Belfast Telegraph in 2008.

Daisy mentioned that photos have been published always with the same two cousins. If we include only first cousins, the children of one's parents' brothers and sisters, in Kate's case there are none as she is an only child. Of Gerry's siblings, John has the two in the photos (Fiona and Gregor) and Trisha has as far as I am aware only one much older son Paul. The other two sisters have no children. There could of course be a lot of more distant cousins (descended from siblings of the Healy and McCann grandparents) but maybe they don't get together that often if at all. I think that the stories of vast gatherings of relatives are simply made up, like so many others.

Paul appears in this unedited version of a photo which has previously been posted.

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

Wonder why the other two sisters never had children, normal to get the odd one, but unusual to have two in such a close family

as Gerry's and added factor Kate had such bad problems with getting pregnant, could there be a gene defect there maybe?

Marian wrote:Daisy mentioned that photos have been published always with the same two cousins. If we include only first cousins, the children of one's parents' brothers and sisters, in Kate's case there are none as she is an only child. Of Gerry's siblings, John has the two in the photos (Fiona and Gregor) and Trisha has as far as I am aware only one much older son Paul. The other two sisters have no children. There could of course be a lot of more distant cousins (descended from siblings of the Healy and McCann grandparents) but maybe they don't get together that often if at all. I think that the stories of vast gatherings of relatives are simply made up, like so many others.

Paul appears in this unedited version of a photo which has previously been posted.

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

Gerry made a rather early trip to the US? Was all this stress on the Irish myth of one large happy family, all there for each other etc. etc. (I'll be seeing leprechauns next) also for the benefit of the big Irish community in the US?
Because the whole thing is looking pretty fake. Maddie is definitely messed around with in the photographs imo. The background doesn't make sense in terms of the time it was taken. Well, we have a rock, no problem, doesn't have to be Ireland, and we have possibly the wrong background to a group of children.

Marian wrote:You can see the name McCanns on the pub. I would guess that it was at one time owned by someone called McCann (remember it's a very common name in Ireland) and that has led to the myth that it was Gerry's parents.

I'm at a loss though to think of a reason for the McCanns to keep the story going.

The pub certainly doesn't appear to have been in use for years.

That's a good question Marian, one that keeps me researching the Donegal connection.

I'd like to say this is just my opinion, or my theory, but it's more than that. I have every reason to believe that the good will of Irish folk (in particular), was taken advantage of from a very early stage. It's pretty clear right from the outset someone (maybe clarrie?) spotted much mileage for financial gain from the Irish market. Gerry, Kate, Clarence and a few others are all quoted praising the Irish public for their "overwhelming generosity". According to Gerry over 50% of all "cards" from wellwishers came from Ireland. So why wouldn't they milk it? A bit risky I agree, "but in in terms of marketing, it was a good ploy".


I found this bit of info earlier, It is, as far as I know the only article that mentions this information. Credit: themaddiecasefiles because the original article appears to have been whooshed or buried deep. dated 5/5/2007 & 8/5/2007?


"Maddy's great-grandfather Joe McCann owned a pub in St Johnston after retiring as an RIC constable.

One
of his three sons, Johnny, married Eileen, from Burtonport, in the
1960s and they moved to Scotland where heart surgeon Gerry - Maddy's
father - was born." [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

So, the Irish market proved very lucrative right at the very beginning; a marketing strategy was put in place to take every advantage. However, they needed stronger links than 'great grandfather once ran a pub there' Jeez! even I can lay claim to that one. ( albeit a different part of Ireland). No, they needed something more current, a solid foundation, (looking at 'their pub' it's anything but) and a spokesperson of course - enter Joe Peoples. Not a relative, (there is not one relative of the McCanns to speak up from Ireland, not one!) just a spokesperson that is quoted differently from one publication/article to another. Interesting to note

Mr Peoples plays a big part in the Donegal story but that's not to say he hasn't been misrepresented, misquoted or 'manipulated' in some way. I just wonder, If that's the case, why hasn't he spoken out?

Here's how the story is built.

We go from: Madeleine's great grandfather Joe running a pub in St Johnston once upon a time (after he retired)

To: Madeleine's grandfather John being born in the "McCanns" Pub. (Possible but hardly likely if his father was retired?)

Then it develops into: Brothers Johnny and Hughie running the pub (supposedly in the early sixties)

Then, so the story goes: Johnny meets Eileen from a different county, they get married and run the McCann pub. Eileen apparently gives birth to John & Philamena whilst living in this pub. (hence the strong connections)

They then emigrate to Scotland (1967). Eileen a biscuit factory worker, Johnny, a carpenter. But they apparently never let go of "the pub" Johnny dies 2004 leaving the pub to Eileen who still owns it to this day under the watchful guide of Joe peoples[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] Although he's none too watchful, they say the pub has been robbed 12 TIMES! Steel doors erected but still ram raided! On St Patricks day too! (just 24 hrs after Eileen visited) fancy that, how low can these theives go? Robbing Maddie's Nanna's pub! Just as funds are running low too, tut tut! Just how much bad luck can one family suffer?

I haven't given links for the above info because I thought it would too messy but if you want the source please feel free to ask. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Marian wrote:There could of course be a lot of more distant cousins (descended from siblings of the Healy and McCann grandparents) but maybe they don't get together that often if at all. I think that the stories of vast gatherings of relatives are simply made up, like so many others.

I can give another example (this time regarding Kate's mother) that proves what you think is right. However, I've prattled on enough in my previous post [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.] so I'll leave it til later.

I'm intrigued as to what info gillyspot has to reveal about the Donegal connection, very intrugued. Please share asap or PM to compare research. [You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Daisy, a very interesting story.

I did some initial checking (found my grandparents on here) but no mention of a McCann from St Johnston, maybe I didn't search properly.

Maybe G McCann's grandparents were blow-ins to Donegal or I missed something. I can see a reference to Cloghan but not Cloghan Liath, Cloghan being more inland. It was only a quick search but I looked for Crolly, Dungloe and St Johnston.

here is the link for 1901 & 1911 [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I remember in the two weeks after madeleine vanished Phil McCann was on Liveline at least twice. this is a very popular phone in programme going out for 75 min Mon to fri. I must see is any podcasts are still available to see if Donegal connections were mentioned. Certainly irish connections were mentioned. Would be interesting to know if the production team sought out Phil Mccann for the show or if she contacted them. She was on for ages.

I remember her criticising the Portuguese police and it all sounded very sad for the Mccanns. You couldn't but feel sorry for them At that time we knew so little of the facts.

Molly wrote:Daisy, a very interesting story.

I did some initial checking (found my grandparents on here) but no mention of a McCann from St Johnston, maybe I didn't search properly.

Maybe G McCann's grandparents were blow-ins to Donegal or I missed something. I can see a reference to Cloghan but not Cloghan Liath, Cloghan being more inland. It was only a quick search but I looked for Crolly, Dungloe and St Johnston.

here is the link for 1901 & 1911 [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I have limited access to genealogy records Molly, but I've gone through all the records available to view for free and I can't find Gerry's family. They are definitely not listed in 1901 census for St Johnston town (or rural district). So their roots in the town they claim to hail from don't appear as strong as they say they are.