Friday, 21 June 2013

"Clean Party Floor" Phenomenon

Many times, in our blog, we’ve told you to see things that you were only looking at but weren't capturing all they were really telling you.

Examples of this are the Paraíso pictures, the Smith Sighting, the body disposal theories, both on the beach and in the church, the Tapas reservation (?) sheets, the Big Round Table (and Brunt’s video registry of it), the Quiz Nights, the non-cryptic picture taken from a balcony different from the one it was said to have been taken from, the Fenn’s supermarket bags and the amazing memory qualities and lapses of some ex-Pats, among many other things.

These are examples of what we've alerted you to but there are as many that we have detected and that are still waiting "in line" for publication.

But today’s post is about something that while we were advising you to use you “eyesight” adequately we were failing to see what was right before our, and your, very own eyes.

We call it the “Clean Party Floor” phenomenon.

It might just be the key to this whole problem and yet it has been biting our heels all this time. One master clutter move on the part of BHs.

One must recognize excellence when one sees it. We won’t do that right now because we’re still in doubt if it was excellence or despair that have kept the obvious hidden away right before our eyes.

Let’s then go straight into our allegory so that you can fully understand what we mean.

Imagine that you, like many of us have or had, have teenage children. You agree to allow your sixteen yr old daughter to have her birthday party at your house with her friends.

At the birthday’s girl request and promise of best behaviour you also agree that you and hubby will not be present.

You take this opportunity and go for a nice romantic dinner with your husband and almost thought of following it with a movie but decided against it because it would make your return much too late in the night.

The negotiations ended with all the parties agreeing that you would return home between 10.30 and 11.00 pm.

On the day, like the loving mother you are, you help set up the birthday table. Besides the birthday cake, you had various sodas, assorted crisps, mini-pizzas, crackers, various pastries, such as vol au vents, cheese straws and anything else that you could remember to prepare.

And to have your princess feel like the “adult” she desperately wants to feel like, you and hubby leave the house before any of her friends arrive, so that she can play fully the role of hostess.

You arrive, as agreed, from your evening at around 10.45. The party is dwindling down and most of her friends have left.

Always the suspicious mother you look around and everything seems to be fine. Besides the dining room, starting with the table. being in a total disarray, which was expected, everything else seems to be in order. Your daughter seems to have earned your trust

The last guests leave and as everyone is tired, you put the rest of the birthday cake in the refrigerator and you all agree to go to bed and leave the cleaning for the next day.

The next morning, being the first to get up, you take the task of cleaning into your own hands. You take all the stuff that was still on the table to the kitchen and come back with a broom… to find the floor spotlessly clean.

You’re before what we call the “Clean Party Floor” phenomenon.

Please don’t confuse this phenomenon with the “Hide the Party” phenomenon. That one is your typical “babysitter party” where you aren’t supposed to know that a party has taken place.

A forgotten beer bottle or a lamp out of place are the tell tale signs of a “Hide the Party” phenomenon, where you discover that there was had been a party albeit all efforts to hide that fact from you.

With the “Clean Party Floor” phenomenon you know that there was a party. You authorized it, you helped prepare it and when you came back home you found a dwindling down party as expected.

The “Clean Party Floor” phenomenon is when what apparently didn’t need any cleaning, was cleaned.

It's risking you'll disregard the oddity of the situation versus the certainty they have that you'll realize what they don't want you to know.

So what is the importance of this?

It shows clearly that someone went into an extra effort trying to hide something specific about what happened during the party.

The floor should have been filthy but wasn't. The expected crumbs and crisp bits were nowhere to be found. And no, a group of teenagers wasn't being careful in eating at a party so as not to litter the floor.

So someone took the trouble to clean some particular kind of mess so that you wouldn’t know about something very specific that had happened.

Two or three motives pop up into my mind about what teenagers would want to hide from you but we’re not here to speak about the teenage parties.

Let’s see where this is applicable to the Maddie Affair. We know that the apartment was exaggeratedly cleaned. And it seems obvious to all of us the reasons as to why it was done.

But is it that obvious?

We, like you, thought that the cleaning was done to remove any and all traces of Maddie’s demise from the apartment.

That meant that the cleaning had one main focus: rid the apartment from any trace of Maddie’s blood.

We know that the body laid in the living room by the window and then was taken from there to the parent’s cupboard where it waited to be removed from the apartment when the time came.

This move is important as this marked the time the first cleaning began, done by non-expert “cleaners”, the T9, to remove all visible traces of blood and so prepare the apartment for the arrival of the Portuguese authorities that would be called when the alarm was to be raised.

Now to clean a fluid like blood, one obviously needs water and the nearest water sources available and at hand were in the bathroom and kitchen.

The diagram above shows the possible routes that the T9 likely used to clean up Maddie’s blood. Note that we include the use of both the kitchen’s interior window and door.

Once that was done, the apartment was ready for the alarm to be raised. As it was, earlier than expected, but was.

Then, later, we now know that a team of expert "cleaners" or as we like to call them “6-cleaners” came to do the job as it should be done.

And they are the one’s who introduce the “Clean Party Floor” phenomenon., which, as we've said, has been right under our noses this whole time and the BHs have dedicated both significant time and effort for us not to see.

As you can see in the diagram above, there was one room that didn’t need to be cleaned. The kids room.

We can’t see how any of Maddie’s blood could have gone into that room.

So, ALL traces of Maddie in that room would have been as expected as the crumbs on the floor in our teenage party.

It would have been VERY convenient in terms of realism for that room to be filled with Maddie’s DNA. After all it would have been where she spent a lot of her time after all, wouldn’t it?

So why wash clean that room completely clean of Maddie?

Why wash the pillowcases and sheets where the child had just slept?

But was Maddie's DNA the only "crumbs" that were expected to be found... and weren't there?

The immediate answer would be the traces of all those who are said, and reported, to have been in that room that night.

So why clean that up too? After all it was evident, as was witnessed and reported by the authorities, how so many people contaminated the crime scene. A contamination that fails to make its "appearance" as we know.

Wouldn't it have been best to leave the room with ALL its traces and not clean it at all?

But, here is where the “Clean Party Floor” phenomenon is crucial.

Are Maddie's DNA and the traces of all those who were there on the night of the 3rd the only missing "crumbs"? No.

If one doesn't forget that the Ocean Club cleaners aren't exactly "expert cleaners" one must ask why also the lack of expected amount of forensic data from former tourists in that apartment and, in particular, in that room?

We have, as far as we know, the evidence of the stain attributed to a 3 yr old.  

The wall and floor stains 9a&b are also attributed to him, which would contradict the blood splatters being from Paul “Labrador” Gordon in the living room who is said to have walked around the apartment trying to staunch bleeding after cutting himself shaving.

We call him Paul “Labrador” Gordon like a Labrador he seems to shake his body with such energy that sprays walls with his blood. But that's hearsay and you know what we think about hearsay.

But if you look at the cleansing of the kids room under the "Clean Party Floor” phenomenon perspective then suddenly you may understand many things.

What if they weren’t cleaning Maddie’s DNA in that room but cleaning all traces of those who had been present in that room in the last days?

Traces of those who could even be "suspected" of being the “abductor” as they fitted the profile of being male and present in PdL during that period of time and had absolutely no excuse, according to the official version, to have been inside the apartment and much less that room.

And we're not talking about only men. If any traces were found inside 5A, of both male or female, present in PdL and with apparently no relationship with the McCanns it would be highly compromising both to the official story and those involved to say the least.

And that is the importance of Profile L and the reason for so much discussion around Maddie’s DNA.

That discussion, my friends had the exact same objective as the negligence theory had for such a long time: to pin you down on irrelevant matter and away from what mattered.

While we went needlessly around in circles about the all the intentionally made complexity (so that it would either confuse, bore or do both) of already complex scientific data of determining DNA,  we didn’t do the intended and that was not to ask the obvious question: why no other DNA?

Discussing Maddie's DNA over and over again, all to distract you from the importance of Profile L.

Profile L wasn't supposed to be found. It slipped through the cracks like the blood and the cadaverine.

The discussion around Maddie's DNA was to distract you from all the important forensic findings REALLY made by FSS which was then "convinced" to "unfind" them.

To distract you from the importance of all the backtracking that FSS was forced to do to comply with the official script.

Maybe, if we go back to Mario Marreiro’s Improved Memory Syndrome, then we all might now understand why Neil Berry was asked, via rogatory letter, the following questions:

* At about 6.00 p.m., in particular, where were you ? Who were you with ?

* Considering the fact that you were seen by a witness, clarify what you were doing at that time next to the stairs leading to the upper floor , which are located next to the lift of Block 5 at the Ocean Club, i.e. not far from the apartment from where Madeleine McCann went missing ?

* On that occasion, did you actually pass by an Ocean Club employee that went there to pick up laundry ?

* If yes, what was the reaction like and why ?"

Laundryman gave an interview one month after his PJ statement, to Daily Mirror on 29/9/07, but didn't want to be named:

“Stocky BRITISH tourist wearing 2 tone glasses spotted by OC worker in the stairwell. " I'll never forget him"

Not Scandinavian here!

Discover what they really were trying to hide from you in that room and there may lie the key to unravel all this mess.

Why clean a room that didn’t need cleaning?

To remove all traces of Maddie's blood was doing a "Hide the Party" but to clean the kid's room was doing a "Clean Party Floor".  

Post Scriptum:  

With saying that we think that the discussion around Maddie's DNA has been but a BH  stalling and distracting technique, we would like to make it very clear that we in no way want to imply that our reader who has stoically defended her points of view against the relentless attacks on the subject made by Insane is a BH.

We believe her to be a true WH and thank her for her very insightful comments.


  1. Great post Textusa(as always)!
    Along with this post, may I suggest reading/re-reading Textusa's "The mystery of profile L":


    New hope in Maddy inquiry as CPS lawyers travel to Portugal

    Justin Davenport, Crime Editor

    21 June 2013

    Government lawyers have travelled to Portugal to meet police and prosecution officials to discuss new leads in the Madeleine McCann inquiry.

    The trip is the first time that lawyers from the Crown Prosecution Service have visited Portugal in connection with Scotland Yard’s £5 million review of the case.

    Home Secretary Theresa May is now expected to announce a full-scale Yard investigation into the disappearance of three-year-old Madeleine in May 2007.

    London’s chief crown prosecutor Alison Saunders and her deputy Jenny Hopkins flew to Portugal in April to meet counterparts to discuss leads identified in the Met’s review.

    Last month the Standard revealed that detectives had identified a list of potential suspects. Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell, who supervised the review, said there were a “good number” of people who should be questioned as well as “further forensic opportunities”.

    The list is thought to number around 20, including Britons. The potential suspects are thought to include a handful of known child-sex offenders who are believed to have been in the Algarve when Madeleine disappeared.

    The visit by senior CPS lawyers underlines the belief among senior detectives that the case could be solved.

    Portuguese police led the search for Madeleine after she went missing from a holiday apartment in Praia da Luz while her parents dined nearby.

    The investigation was shelved in 2008 but the Yard launched a Home Office-funded review in 2011 after David Cameron intervened at the request of Madeleine’s parents, Kate and Gerry McCann. The review team examined hundreds of thousands of documents from the Portuguese investigation and enquiries by a private detective agency employed by Madeleine’s family and identified 195 potential leads.

    A full Yard investigation would allow police to interview suspects in Britain though they would seek the assistance of the Portuguese to carry out any enquiries there.

    A CPS spokesman said: “We continue to work with the police on this case.”

    A Home Office spokesman said it had agreed to “provide the Metropolitan Police with the resources they need”.

  3. CPS went to Portugal in April.
    Senior Crown Prosecutors. CPS review evidence and assess if there is more than 50% chance of a successful prosecution and also, if it is in the public interest to prosecute.
    They do not investigate crimes.
    This suggests something is happening.
    A dead paedo can't be prosecuted.
    It doesn't point to a cover up, as all that requires is for SY to say they passed leads to Portuguese, who won't reopen. This suggests there is a discussion about prosecution.
    Another cover up by officials at Care Quality Commission over hospital death rates is now in the headlines, with talk of police investigations.
    I don't think anyone wants to put their careers on line, now or in a decades time, for the McCann entourage.
    Hoax sightees can't be prosecuted, however dubious the sighting, because it can't be proved the person didn't see anything. They are out of reach of the law. So they may now want to keep a low profile.
    Others who provided stories of diligent checking may get off with a rap on the knuckles if they say they didn't know they were covering up a crime. They may say they were only trying to stop the McCanns losing custody of twins.
    Or has anyone been offered immunity from prosecution.
    Again, time will tell.

  4. The Crown Prosecution Service, or CPS, is a non-ministerial department of the Government of the United Kingdom responsible for public prosecutions of people charged with criminal offences in England and Wales. Its role is similar to that of the longer-established Crown Office in Scotland, and the Public Prosecution Service in Northern Ireland. The CPS is headed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (currently Keir Starmer QC) who answers to the Attorney General for England and Wales (currently Dominic Grieve, QC, MP).

    The Crown Prosecution Service is responsible for criminal cases beyond the investigation, which is the role of the police. This involves giving advice to the police on charges to bring, being responsible for authorising all but a very few simple charges (such as begging), and preparing and presenting cases for court, both in magistrates' courts and, increasingly, the Crown Court.

  5. Unpublished reader at Jun 21, 2013, 7:32:00 PM

    As we've said before, we don't, or want, to deal with other sites' issues.

    Thank you for understanding.

  6. Totally agree Textusa the apartment was given an extra clean to remove evidence - if nothing had happened there would be no need to clean it afterall cleaning would also have removed all traces of the fake abductor, which proves there never was an abductor in the first place otherwise the Mccanns would have left the forensics to the experts and not interferred by cleaning.
    Another thing I find odd is that Kate makes a special reference to the tea stain on Maddies top - this is something significant Textusa because again she would not mention it, she mentions it saying it is a tea stain when obviously it is something else and again she is attempting damage limitation for something that might come out at a later date, it seems such an small thing to bother mentioning so it must be something different to what they claim and important to providing their guilt I also never believed that Maddie said 'why did you not come last night when we were crying' this again was said for another purpose. The Mccanns are a scheming pair of liars and SY seem afraid of them!

    1. I couldnt agree more, but nothing is getting done it seems!

  7. Anon #6,

    The Scotland Yard is not afraid of the McCanns.

    No one was ever afraid of the McCanns.

    They're also not scheming liars. They're just liars. Obeying to a script imposed on them to follow.

    To be a scheming liar one needs to scheme and the scheming was not on the McCanns hands.

    Any scheming done WITHIN the T9 wasn't done by the McCanns.

    As we've tried to show repeatedly the McCanns are just a couple that were overpowered by events.

    What is highly reprehensible about the McCanns was their enjoyment in the role they were told to play.

    Their lack of respect for their daughter's memory is simply repulsive.

    To say the McCanns were, are or will ever be powerful is as much clutter as saying they were negligent.

    They were neither powerful nor negligent.

    Finally, it's not fear that is stopping (for now) SY from acting.

  8. bonsoir Textusa et tous les autres,

    Lorsque les Mac Cann sont venus à PDL, ils sont venus avec d'autres du RU ou d'ailleurs, pour satisfaire leur goût du "swinging", bien !
    Tout le monde venait avec ses enfants comme couverture, en effet comment imaginer que ces gentilles petite familles n'étaient là que pour autre chose qu'une semaine de vacances en famille ??
    Donc, il y avait des nurses pour s'occuper des enfants, le soir ou la crèche pour la journée, donc, pas de négligence, les enfants étaient en sécurité
    certainement que dans ces moments "spéciaux" des VIP étaient également présents, et que pour les protèger, eux, d'un scandale, il a fallu échafauder des plans très "sophistiqués" !!
    Je comprends tout cela, la seule question et la plus importante, que s'est-il passé avec Maddie ??? que lui est-il arrivé et quand et pourquoi ???
    Et je vous approuve lorsque vous dites que vous trouvez leur attitude "repulsive"
    maintenant, y a-t-il un espoir que la Vérité sorte 6 ans après, et savez-vous pourquoi Mr Amaral est muet comme une tombe ?????
    ps : bravo pour votre français

  9. 5A used as a centre point for the swing?
    And Madeleine and the other kids stored in a different apart ( as Paulo Rebelo suspects) under the surveillance of a nanny ( the one that was tide up to the neck by the Mccs)?

  10. Censored comment from Insane:

    "Not Textusa has left a new comment on your post ""Clean Party Floor" Phenomenon":


    (Quote from post) If one doesn't forget that the Ocean Club cleaners aren't exactly "expert cleaners"one must ask why also the lack of expected amount of forensic data from former tourists in that apartment and, in particular, in that room?

    (Quote from post) We have, as far as we know, the evidence of the stain attributed to a 3 yr old.

    (Quote from post) The wall and floor stains 9a&b are also attributed to him, which would contradict the blood splatters being fromPaul “Labrador” Gordon in the living room who is said to have walked around the apartment trying to staunch bleeding after cutting himself shaving.

    (Quote from post) We call him Paul “Labrador” Gordon like aLabrador he seems to shake his body with such energy that sprays walls with his blood. But that's hearsay and you know what we think about hearsay.

    (Quote from post) But if you look at the cleansing of the kids room under the "Clean Party Floor” phenomenon perspective then suddenly you may understand many things.

    (Quote from post) What if they weren’t cleaning Maddie’s DNA in that room but cleaning all traces of those who had been present in that room in the last days?

    A few points, (censored)

    There were no ''blood splatters'' recovered from apartment 5a
    The wall and floor stains labelled 9a and 9b were not attributed to the little boy whose DNA profile is listed as profile L. This is either pure invention on your part, or a complete inability to read and understand the files. Several hairs were recovered which matched the same DNA profile, and that presumably is what you are referring to, unless you were setting out to deliberately mislead.
    The fact that there were hairs found which were shed by previous residents also gives the lie to the bollocks about the flat being subject to ''exaggerated cleaning''
    Where do you get the idea that there was less DNA from former residents than expected? Support this claim with references please (she can't, so don't get your hopes up)
    You can't ''selectively clean'' a room of the DNA of one individual whilst leaving others behind.


    Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at Jun 22, 2013, 3:39:00 AM"

  11. Insane censored #10,

    This is where we based what we have said in our post.

    “9A. Stain on the floor collected using a dry swab.
    9B. Stain on the wall collected using a swab wet with distilled water.”


    “286A/2007-CRL 9A & B Swabs collected from the wall of the apartment
    An incomplete DNA result, apparently originating from a male individual, was obtained through LCN from the cellular material present in the combined swabs. In my opinion, there are no indications that justify [confirm/prove] the theory that any member of the McCann family had contributed DNA to this result. Also, this result did not match in any way the profile obtained from swabs 286A/2007 CRL 1A & B.”


    “I conclude further that, the DNA profiles obtained from the 'crime stain 1' and 286A/2007/CRL9A & B coincide with Charlie Gordon (bar code 51156964). I believe that Charlie Gordon was born on 29 January 2005, and if this is the case, in my opinion, the DNA profile obtained in 'crime stain 1' is not the result of semen found on the blanket.”


    John Lowe”

    This issue, as well as the location of hairs, will be dealt with in the blog, in detail, shortly.

  12. I'm sure Insane is quite aware of what he's saying.
    It then begs the question- what was the substance on walls and floor. If blood, what happened to Charlie for it to get there?
    Or is profile L someone else?
    Was there some mix up with samples-?

  13. Anon #12,

    All we can say is that Insane motivates the team to look again at the evidence and in doing so, we come across useful information; like Professor Cortareal.

  14. Textusa, you open a can of worms with your insight eye. Insane, which according to my point of view is part of the group of expat residents in PDL, is accusing the pain of the needle that hit them exactly in the middle of their heart.
    The 5a and profile L are masterpieces on Maddie investigation. They know who is Profile L and maybe they know, the police knows who he is. The deep clean was not perfect.

  15. #6, the "tea stain" strange, no? A 3 year old child drinking tea?! And I suppose, black tea (not herbal infusion), if it left a tea has caffeine, or more exactly teine, not appropriate for small children, imo...I do not believe the "tea stain" story!

    1. I've been drinking tea since I came off breastmilk! And my four year old sons the same, so it is plausible, its only because it comes from her that I doubt it happened at all!

  16. # 6 and 15 I do not believe the tea stain story either there is something odd about that for the Mccanns to mention it when she wrote her book years later.

  17. DO NOT PUBLISH Insane, at Jun 22, 2013, 12:01:00 PM

    Let's get something perfectly clear, you have no say on what we decide to publish, not publish, edit or censor here.

    Your alleged ownership of copyright of your own comments is superseded by our clear warning to comments to be submitted that they are moderated : "Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse."

    Please refrain from wasting our time as you now have your own blog for anyone interested in reading the full, unedited abuse and swearing.

  18. Why are we discussing something said by Kate such as tea stain when the post is about how the kid's room was professionally cleaned and that what FSS has said isn't to be trusted? Trying to distract?

  19. Textusa,

    What is your opinion about this tea stain? I would be very interested in hearing what you have to say about it.

  20. Anon 18 - The posts concerning the tea stain are relevant. This is a discussion forum and each poster adds to the discussion as Textusa has mentioned previously points get looked over and then when we are drawn back to them we often see a different picture emerging.
    The first few posts on here are concerning the CPS they are not mentioning the cleaning of the apartment but you did not comment on these posts. The others posters that have mentioned the tea stain feel it is relevant to the discussion they are not distracting but simply adding their opinions.

  21. ..."You can't ''selectively clean'' a room of the DNA of one individual whilst leaving others behind."

    Back, you are again with your game Insane. Yes, you can .... If you want, let's say DEEP CLEAN FIRST AND AFTER SELECTIVELY CONTAMINATE THE PLACE.
    From what I read in the files, and Paulo Reis on his blog, dedicate a big analyse on the hair samples... Hair samples from Kate, Gerry
    and some T7 males were recovered from the flat. Few, in my opinion, if I consider the chaos that must be instaled on the people close to the child, when a child disappears without them knowing where she went.
    The amount of hair recovered, shows that even the contamination involving the main characters, was methodical, qb.
    No hair from D Payne, who was kept on the crime scene by Mccann's own words. Another story created to give alibis for the crucial hours. Probably the hours, the T9 were all busy dealing with the body and cleaning the blood traces, out of the eyes of any independent witness. Exactely the same time, the Berries also delivered a story of a cot to be setled in one room and the preparation for a take away dinner.

    Provide us with link which proves " hair from previous residents was recovered". Why you use the word "residents"? Was the flat not rented for guests who came for short holidays, a week or so? Interesting.

  22. Insane bites the dust! AGAIN! Go bints and minions!!!

  23. Even Lazzeri is forced to write:

    CPS lawyers go to Algarve in hunt for Maddie kidnapper

    Published: 15 hrs ago

    BRIT prosecutors have been to Portugal in the hunt for Madeleine McCann’s kidnapper — signalling fresh momentum in the bid to solve the mystery.

    Lawyers from the Crown Prosecution Service flew to the Algarve as part of Scotland Yard’s £5million review of the three-year-old’s disappearance in May 2007.

    A list of around 20 suspects — including Brits and Portuguese — has been drawn up by UK detectives.

    Among them are known child sex offenders in the region at the time Madeleine, from Rothley, Leics, disappeared from her parents’ rented holiday villa in Praia da Luz.

    Some were looked at as part of the original inquiry by Portuguese police, and will now face a fresh grilling.

    The CPS team included London’s chief crown prosecutor Alison Saunders and deputy Jenny Hopkins. They flew out at the end of April but the trip only emerged yesterday.

    Det Chf Supt Hamish Campbell leads two-year-old Operation Grange.

    Madeleine’s parents Kate, 45, and Gerry, 44, would not comment.

  24. Anon #19,

    We haven’t looked at the stain in detail as we don’t attribute any importance to it at this point in time.

    If we find it to be relevant we will obviously revisit the issue.

    Kate's book links stain to night Maddie asked why they didn't come when she called.

    Said they noticed it in the morning. Kate washed top and hung it on verandah to dry. She avoids giving and theory or explanation.

    Why wash it when there was a washing machine?

    We can only suggest she's hinting at drugging attempt the previous night.

    Why mention washing? Unless to explain why Maddie was put back into same Pjs, rather than say there was a stain on the top but she wore it the next night.

    That to Kate may have seemed to imply she wasn't fussy about clean Pjs? She had to portray herself as attentive mother? Who knows? Pure speculation on our part.

    We think the tea stain was Kate’s attempt at hinting the abductor drugged her. Agree nothing said without a reason

    But we’ve also read that the tea stain could be something other than tea. That we think is clutter of the worst kind. Clutter spread out to gross people away from the issue.

    In all our investigations let us make this perfectly clear: we haven’t found any evidence that Maddie was a victim of molestation.

    Any bodily fluid that may have been found in Apartment 5A was the result of circumstances involving consenting adults.

  25. The stain story was to bake the idea of an abductor with easy acess to the flat ( a key), inside the room on the night before Maddie disappeared. Very convennient, if we "insightly" stripover Kates book for the message she wants to pass.... The abductor must be a worker from the OC.
    Intelligent Kate forgot 2 things:
    - the first statement delivered to the police by Silvia( the manager on duty that night). She did not believe a word from the Mccann's because of what she saw in situ. ( Silvia, was probably not contacted at so early stage to align with the cover up).
    - the poor skills Kate shows, as a mother, while saying that her daughter cried the night before but, no matter, on the night of the tragic events she left her alone again to enjoy herself with friends. And on top of that, she washed the pyjama where she found a strange stsin.
    Who believes that? Only who desperatly wants to transform a lie in to truth, a fantasy in a fact. And why washing a pyjama if they were at the end of their holidays? One more night with a stain, did not make any difference, specially when the weather was not so friendly and having a pyjama handwashed dried, by early evening, was the most certain uncertainity. ( btw, she said, she wash it in the afternoon....well, through the mouth, dies the fish).

  26. at 25 - agree with your comments Kate introduced the tea stain on Maddies top to give the idea that the abductor had given maddie medication and been in their apartment and why would she want to hand wash something at the end of the holiday? Pure fantasy.

  27. From the Lazzery article:

    "Madeleine's parents Kate, 45, and Gerry, 44 would not comment." comment from Rothley Manor...? Not even the usual "Kate and Gerry pleased, hopeful, encouraged" with this new move from the british police? As they were quoted as being with the launch of Operation Grange?

    "Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: "Kate and Gerry remain very, very pleased with the work that Scotland Yard are doing and have been encouraged by Operation Grange from the day it began."

  28. Yes, I too agree that the tea stain was only mentioned to reinforce the idea of an abductor! According to this article, Kate did not assume it was a tea stain and nothing more than a tea stain, it was a brown stain that LOOKED LIKE a tea stain!
    She's passing the thought that someone was in the room that night, and woke Madeleine and made her cry(the crying incident), perhaps trying to give her some medicine to make her sleep and it spilled on the pijamas, that's my feeling. An intruder whose DNA also managed to fall under the "clean party floor" syndrome...none to be found! What a clever and careful intruder, he/she must have come in completely covered from head to toe in some sort of protective and hermetic garment, like we see in the movies, the "astronaut" type garment! Poor Madeleine, no wonder she would cry her lungs out if she had ever seen such a figure!

    "But it is my belief there was somebody either in, or trying to get in, the children’s bedroom that night, and that is what disturbed them. The only other unexplained detail I remember from that morning was a large, brown stain I noticed on Madeleine’s pink Eeyore pyjama top. It looked like a tea stain."

    "At the time I just assumed it was a drink spillage that had escaped our attention, and that might well be all it was."

    Read more:
    Washed Up?, 05 January 2012( Dr. Martin Roberts)

    "On 3 May, during breakfast, 'she noticed a stain, supposedly of tea, on Madeleine's pyjama top, which she washed a little later that same morning. She hung it out to dry on a small stand, and it was dry by the afternoon. Madeleine sometimes drank tea; nevertheless the stain did not appear during breakfast, maybe it happened another day, as Madeleine did not have tea the previous night and the stain was dry.' (KM witness statement, 6.9.07)."

    (worth reading the entire Dr. Roberts article)

  29. I do not think it was a tea stain when my children were Madeleines age they never drank tea because they did not like it. An adult might say 'tea stain' because they drink tea' but often children do not like tea.
    I also believe Kate is covering up.

  30. Did Murat make his announcement about T9 going back to Portugal to do a reconstruction around the time CPS was there?
    Was he interviewed by SY and thought the others should be too?
    That announcement was for a reason as was Kate’s visit to PdL (was she questioned by Portuguese police in the presence of SY?)and Old Mother Hubbard being with Kate?
    Also Kate's mother made an announcement around the same time.
    I presume it’s the real deal this time.
    Old Mother Hubbard is a character from a children's’ nursery rhyme.

  31. 12 Set 2007:

    "O Blog Gazeta Digital, do jornalista Paulo Reis, revela um dado novo que pode ser útil na investigação. Segundo revela o blog, Mari Olli, a senhora norueguesa que afirmou ter visto Madeleine em Marrocos, viveu durante algum tempo em Rotley (terra dos McCann) e residia a escassos minutos do hospital onde Gerry trabalhava."

    Mari Olli não é a testemunha que rapidamente colocou Maddie em Marrocos, começando o Jogo que havia de ocupar várias policias por muito tempo, distraindo do cerne onde deveria estar a investigacão? O mesmo blog confirmou que Olli detinha uma empresa de limpeza especializada no sul de Espanha, e isso valeu uma troca de emails entre Paulo Reis e Olli, onde o jornalista foi duro e peremptório em relação às suas revelações, e Olli " enfiou a viola no Saco". Claramente, a sra ficou sem argumentos.
    Quem terá limpo o ap 5a? Alguém especializado na matéria, não português, e suficientemente próximo do Algarve para chegar lá em tempo útil sem levantar suspeitas. Alguém de contacto acessivel p/ quem bastasse uma simples chamada de tm.
    Oh my silly brain... Definitivamente, a análise às chamadas dos tm é crucial, provavelmente aos tms de um grupo mais alargado que os T9.

  32. #31,

    The lady, Mari Olli Pollard:


    "Correspondence between Mrs. Pollard and Jounalist Paulo Reis"

    Ray Pollard mailto:xxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.comHello,

    I am thankful for your work and efforts to clear the Madeleine case. But can you please remove my picture (Mari Olli) immediately! I have informed the press that I regret, the use of my picture, because the whole case is traumatic enough for me to handle.
    My highest wish is that we can get a answer about what happened and a clarify. Please remove the A1 security web and the information about Rays brother Tony Pollard, because this has nothing to do with the case. A1 security has nothing to do with the case and they are not base in Alhurin the Grande. Please confirm when this is done.
    Kind Regards
    Ray and Mari"


    "From: Paulo Reis
    To: Mr. and Mrs. Pollard,

    About the “order” you “gave” me, demanding the immediate removal of the picture of Mrs. Mary Olli from my blog, my answer is short and clear: No!
    I will correct the reference to A1 Security, because you said that company is not based in Alhurin Grande. You think this information “has nothing to do with the case” of Madeleine McCann disappearance. That’s your opinion. I think this detail is worth mentioning. And I am the Editor of my blog.
    Anything else, please pay attention to the fact that none of you is a judge or sit in a Court, so any “orders” or demands made in such a way as you did, are completely worthless for me. If you want to “upgrade” your demands and send it through a Court, please be advised to get a lawyer with a good command of Portuguese and Chinese language.
    I am a permanent resident of Macau Special Administrative Region, in China. So, only the local courts have the legal power to give me “orders” similar to the one you emailed me. And Chinese and Portuguese are the official languages of Macau.
    Paulo Reis"

    It seems Mari Olli got "cold feet" on this matter and decided to paddle back..."tarde piás-te"...(portuguese folk saying meaning more or less, "too little,too late")

  33. 32,

    Wonder why Mrs Olli find the " whole case is traumatic enough for me to handle".
    What a odd feeling for somebody who appeared to the case as a witness who voluntarely contacted the british police. Or was she not so voluntary and not an innocent and genuine witness?

    Each character of that story, has a strange shadow behind. I never buy the statements of that lady.

  34. A Polícia Inglesa vem agora revelar que estavam no Algarve, à data do desaparecimento de Maddie McCann, em Maio de 2007, 20 suspeitos de crimes contra crianças. Que segundo as autoridades inglesas deveriam agora ser sujeitas a um interrogatório.

    Segundo o jornal inglês Guardian , esta informação terá sido comunicada pela Polícia inglesa às autoridades portuguesas num encontro realizado muito recentemente , onde terá sido solicitada a reabertura do processo.

    O Ministério Público considera que não existem indícios para a reabertura.

    Ex agente da PJ:
    E, considera bem. Isto é mais do mesmo. Quer dizer, quando se deu o caso Maddie e recuamos a 2008 (?) , a polícia inglesa, na altura , e a pedido das autoridades Portuguesas , tal como outras Polícias estrangeiras informaram-nos ( Instituição PJ) de todos os violadores sexuais de menores que eles tinham conhecimento e que estavam na região do Algarve. Assim como a Polícia Portuguesa fez o mesmo dos nossos, aqueles que já estavam na base de dados da Polícia e que residiriam no Algarve . E, toda essa gente foi passada a pente fino. Foram investigados no sentido de se saber se havia alguma conexão entre eles e a pequena Maddie . Podíamos alargar o âmbito da investigação até mais longe do que o Algarve . E houve alguns abusadores sexuais portugueses e estrangeiros, que viviam fora do Algarve , nomeadamente na zona da Grande Lisboa, que também foram investigados.

    Portanto, o que as autoridades inglesas estão a fazer , depois da investigação ter sido encerrada, e na qual eles ( os ingleses ) já gastaram, segundo os jornais de UK, 5. 8 milhões de euros nessa " investigação, e o que dali resultou é NADA.

    Ou seja, nós voltamos a ter do lado das autoridades inglesas de existir uma suspeita …….

    Existe uma suspeita que ficou na opinião pública que é se os pais de Maddie tiveram ou não alguma coisa a ver com a situação. E, como não é claro…. O que se sabe é que a Menina desapareceu e não voltou a aparecer . Exista a suspeita, que foi encontrada pelos ingleses, a história da amostra de sangue com elevada probabilidade de ser , ou seja, nós sabemos que aquele sangue era dos filhos dos mccann. Não sabemos é se era de Maddie. A amostra de sangue encontrada no apartamento e descoberta pelos cães. Portanto, por aí não vai.

    Agora, o que se pretende aqui claramente é reabrir o processo no sentido que se vá novamente para o rapto e, de uma vez por todas fique conclusivo o rapto.

    Porquê? Porque assim iliba o casal mccann e que não tiveram nada a ver com aquilo. Desde Lockhart sabemos que o testemunho mais difícil , aquele que é mais falível é a memória, o testemunho pessoal . Não faz sentido nenhum, sem nenhuma prova científica e ao fim destes anos todos . Ou um suspeito assume que foi ele que ratou a criança ou ouvir alguma pessoa a dizer " eu vi esta pessoa com estas características ..

    Estamos aquí claramente num logro.

    JP. ( Júlia Pinheiro ) isto é uma questão quase política.

    Ex PJ : é uma questão política de ilibar alguém e a forma de ilibar é assim ( o "rapto"). E as autoridades Portuguesas , nós fomos demasiado instrumentalizados

    Está na altura das ilações. Ou há alguma coisa que seja palpável e que mereça ou

    andar aqui a fazer favores aos ingleses ou a quem quer que seja , acho um erro rotundo.

  35. #34, Aren't these child abusers the ones the british police demanded to PJ NOT to divulge their identities to the public? I remember that before the PJ files were made public, a team of british police were in Lisbon, to ensure the files concerning those paedophiles were held back, were kept under judiciary secret. The british police KNEW who they were and were they were, and showed no other interest in them other than keeping their identities secret! And now all this "interest"...something stinks to high heavens!

  36. The very dark secrets coming from some in UK never will do Justice to Maddie. Nor to GA.........

    The couple will be "frozen like not suspects" by some in their country.

    This case is a big shame to UK . How can this country do this? Lie, clean, whitewash, tabloids, unreal stories.......

    And a PJ´s nephew was killed in London, september 2010, only with ONE shot is his head with a very antique pistol and His Family is waiting for the culprit .

    And more case with Portuguese people there.



  38. Os ingleses andam em circulos e vão acabar por morder o próprio calcanhar. Mais uma vez tiro o chapéu à PJ pela postura que tem tido.
    Os ingleses vão ficar sem saída credivel e a única maneira de se livrarem da situação será deixarem que o caso caia no esquecimento e a opinião pública inglesa não questione para onde foi efetivamente o dinheiro e que resultados concretos conseguiram.
    A história dos pedófilos, ciganos, maltrapilhas, etc, foi toda estripada pela PJ, Europol e Interpol, desde o inicio.
    Claro que o sangue era da Maddie. Se fosse dos gémeos, estaria revelado resultado da análise desde o inicio. Afinal uma das criança a tem cromossoma Y ( logo fica fora no mais simples dos testes) e ambas, embora apresentem uma combinação do ADN dos seus pais têm um ADN completamente diferente do de Maddie. Não é preciso obter a sequência total de alelos para detetar a diferença. 15/17 é muito mais que 50% , é mais que suficiente. Só q/ nenhum PJ pode dizer que é da Maddie, na TV pq/ os protagonistas que se recusam a reconstruir a noite do crime, imediatamente vestem o papel de vitimas e dizem que a PJ quer é resolver o caso e incriminá-los. Não é preciso vir alguém assumir o crime. Basta que sejam obrigados a reconstituir a noite, que os factos falarão por si. É isso que vai acontecer um dia, mesmo sem os T9 e em directo com transmissão para todo o mundo e o aval de um painel de policias internacionais que estarão a credibilizar o trabalho da PJ.
    Este caso só envergonha a policia inglesa e levanta uma grande questão: quantos outros casos resolveram assim, deliberadamente Safando os culpados e incriminando inocentes?

  39. Está toda a gente triste e sem esperança, não é?

    Everyone is sad and hopeless, is not it?

    The truth never will come out. The bluff is infinite.

    Many in UK believed last news but i , like Portuguese, never believed .

    Very sad.......


Comments are moderated.

Comments are welcomed, but its reserved the right to delete comments deemed as spam, transparent attempts to get traffic without providing any useful commentary, and any contributions which are offensive or inappropriate for civilized discourse.