Friday, 11 April 2014


BLUF: To demonstrate that Smithman had many opportunities to avoid the Smiths even taking into account the motion of all participants, so confirming that contact was intentional on his part.


We are accused of writing in riddles. We are aware we do write long and detailed posts and we have explained why we do that. We are also aware that our posts are objective.

To make that clear we have decided to use something that Wikipedia says is commonly used in US military writing: BLUF – Bottom Line Up Front.

A quick and objective summary of what the post is about.


We have dealt extensively in the past with the Smith Sighting. About its reasons (to have an “abductor” seen that night on PdL’s streets), about its participants (Gerry carrying Tanner’s blonde daughter), about its myths (debunking the ideas that the body was disposed of at the beach or church), about why it went wrong (Smiths taking way too long to come forward) and about what we consider evident: Smithman’s clear intent in making contact with the Smiths.

We have shown why this intent is very clear in two ways.

One was to debunk the idea the child being carried was dead, so showing that no body was carried that night in Rua da Escola Primária. The child being alive meant the girl seen carried was to look like Maddie being abducted.

The other was to show how the geographical reality of where it all happened proves there were many opportunities for Smithman to escape contact and the fact that he didn’t can only mean he wanted to be seen.

These were the posts where we showed you why the Smith Sighting was intentional due to the geographical reality and the fact the carried girl was very much alive:

Even so, it seems that there remains doubt about the Smithman’s intent of being seen. We apparently have yet to take into account that both Smithman and Smiths were moving towards each other and so he could have surprised them and he be surprised by them.

We received a comment precisely to that effect:

"Sorry Textusa,

Must disagree with you about the Smith Sighting. It wasn’t intentional. The Smith girl clearly states that she sees the man only after she comes up from the stairs and looks to her left. She’s surprised by him. Peter Smith says he saw the man IMMEDIATELY at the beginning of the Rua Escola Primária. So they crossed at the corner of this street with Rua 25 de Abril. They all walked into each other. The Smiths were walking up the stairs when the man was walking down Rua Escola Primária. It was an all-round surprise encounter!
And where is it written in the PJ Files that Smithman stopped long enough and with near enough proximity to be asked by a total stranger if the dead body of the child he was holding was asleep?!?

Please feel free not to publish this."

Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 29 November 2013 15:49:00 "

We received this comment and decided not to publish it as it seemed to raise doubts about the intention of the Smith Sighting which we wanted to clarify in a post.

It says that we may have been wrong about what we said in our Intentional - Not Debatable Fact post about the clear, and not debatable Smithman's intention to be seen by the Smiths in that event known as the Smith Sighting.

We have said time and time again, and will now repeat, that we like to be corrected. Openly. Transparently.

For logic’s sake. If things are there that need be corrected, then we must do just that. We don’t mind being shown to be wrong, on the contrary, we welcome it. To proceed uncorrected is to base following arguments on false premises.

To correct us is to be our friend. That simple, that true.

We certainly don't want to be accused of intellectual dishonesty.

We don't put other people's work on caution without justification and promising to come back to the subject but never doing so. Whenever we have disagreed with someone we have always justified our disagreement.

We have always answered our readers' questions and have always corrected our statements when we found ourselves wrong.

We have never pretended to look the other way when something went against our line of thought. On the contrary, we have always confronted contradiction. Just like we're doing today.

There is currently an exception to this, and it's about the CMTV documentary. We have still to provide our opinion on it. But as we have said, we will do so as soon as a sentence of the trial is reached.

The Smith Sighting is of capital importance in the Maddie Affair. There can be no doubt about it. The granularity of its analysis is never too great.

The correction above was basically to tell us that we didn’t take into account that all those involved in the Smith Sighting were moving. The Smiths didn’t simply stay put where the crossings happened and wait for Smithman to pass by them.

Mathematically, it's the inverse situation of the very well known problem of determining the crossing point of two different trains leaving from their respective stations and coming towards each other at different speeds.

If they came at the same speed they would meet exactly at half way.

In the Smith Sighting we have, as we have shown but will show again, the exact location for each crossing, so what is to be determined is, at a certain point in time, the distance each “train” is from the respective crossing point.

The “trains” in question being Smithman coming from one direction and Peter Smith, Martin Smith and AS coming towards him.


The opening comment of the post reveals that there seems to be confusion about where the crossings with the Smiths and Smithman happened. 

If at the Rua da Escola Primária or at the corner between this street and Rua 25 de Abril

This confusion has been generated by the use of the expression IMMEDIATELY at the beginning of Rua Escola Primária by both Peter and Martin in their statements about where the crossings happened.

Mr. Amaral, in his book, places the crossing well inside Rua da Escola Primária:

According to some translations, both Peter and Martin apparently say IMMEDIATELY at the beginning of Rua Escola Primária

However, what is written in the PJ Files is “logo no início” which translates into “right at the beginning”

Take into account that the statement is taken from English, translated at that moment into Portuguese and then back again into English.

Speculating, what may have been “at the beginning” became “logo no início” which in turn, wrongly, became “immediately at the beginning”.

Without speculation is that we have both Peter and Martin Smith SAYING they crossed with Smithman “right at the beginning of Rua Escola Primária”.

What is the difference?

It isn’t exactly mere wordplay. “Right at the beginning” is somewhat more vague in terms of precision than “immediately at the beginning”.

The latter, much more so than the first, would seem to indicate that both Martin or Peter were NOT yet in Rua da Escola Primária but still coming up the stairs or crossing Rua 25 de Abril when Smithman was approaching both.

If that was so, then it would mean that Smithman would only have realised the Smiths' presence when it was too late to react, thus justifying the encounter as accidental and in no way intentional as we have here stated, beyond any sort of doubt, that it was.

But that just can't be. It's simply not possible for Martin and Peter to both NOT yet be in Rua da Escola Primária when Smithman approached. Why? Because both Martin and Peter SAY it can’t be.

Let’s, for just a minute, suppose that the “IMMEDIATELY” is the result of correct translation, although we know it’s not. That would mean that both Peter and Martin would have to be in exact same spot, or very, very near each other.

The statements tell us the family had separated into groups. From the statements alone we don’t know into how many (as we'll see later, it can be inferred from images that it was into 3).

If Martin and Peter were part of the same group then the description of what they saw would have been identical or very similar.

They aren’t, as we’ll see.

Peter Smith “refers that when he crossed with the individual, the man was coming down on his [Peter’s] right, the deponent circulating in the middle of the street

Martin Smith “refers that when he crossed with the individual, the man was coming down in the middle of the road, on the street

Note that Peter is very clear that he's in themiddle of the street. He's not at a crossing. Martin says he sees Smithman when the man is in the middle of the road”.

We assume that the street/road referred is Rua da Escola Primária as any speculation that it is any other route simply doesn't make sense for someone coming from Apartment 5A.

So we have Smithman crossing Peter, standing in the middle of the road, on Peter’s right, and appearing on the middle of the road to Martin when Martin first becomes aware of him.

As we’ll see later, Smithman crosses with Martin on Martin’s left.

So the sequence is this: Smithman crosses with Peter on Peter’s right, crosses the street so that when Martin becomes aware of him he’s in the middle of the road and then crosses Martin on Martin’s left.

For this to happen you need one thing: space.

Space between Martin and Peter.

They can’t BOTH be at the intersection between Rua da Escola Primária and Rua 25 de Abril. even though they BOTH say “right at the beginning”.

To one of them, the one who is walking in front of the group, Peter, the words “right at the beginning” mean that he is indeed at the beginning Rua da Escola Primária but inside it.

How far in?

Peter shows this very, very clearly. Or the PJ does in his name.

The PJ Files show, in images, EXACTLY where Peter says Peter crossed with Smithman.

To doubt in any way this EXACT location is to doubt Peter’s capability to point a finger or the PJ’s capability to represent where, EXACTLY, he has pointed his finger:

The letter P indicates exactly where Smithman crossed with Peter Smith. It's well inside Rua Escola Primária. It's at its beginning, but well inside it.

To take as more accurately the words “immediately at the beginning” (a mistranslation of “right at the beginning”) over a finger pointed location is just to make up fact to fit the story.

The images, much more than the words, the images are ABSOLUTELY clear as to where EXACTLY the THREE sightings happened:

This in turn allows us to determine the distances between the 3 crossing points:

We know that the approximate distances between the CPs are the following:

- CP1 – CP2 = 17 metres (Peter and Martin)

- CP2 – CP3 = 11 metres (Martin and AS)

- CP1 – CP3 = 28 metres (Peter and AS)

Considering that where Smithman crosses with Martin Smith is where Rua da Escola Primária starts, then Peter Smith is approximately 17 metres into it when he’s crossed.


In the problem of the trains leaving the station one is given the distance between the stations and the speed of both trains. With these 3 values (distance, speed train1 and speed train2) one is able to calculate the meeting or crossing point.

As we said, in the Smith sighting, we have only the location of crossing points. What one wishes to calculate is, at a certain point in time, the distance between the 2 “trains”, Smithman and a Smith. The values that one requires, and doesn’t have, are the speeds of each of these 2 elements.

That is overcome by using the value of Smithman’s speed, whatever it may have been, and reference the Smith’s walking speed to it.

We’ll use 3 relative speeds: Smithman (SM) and Smith (S) walking at a same speed towards each other, S walking at half of SM’s speed and S walking at a quarter of SM’s speed.

To have S walk faster than SM is simply not realistic.

It can easily be understood that when SM is at 100 metres from the crossing point (CP), then:

- S will be, if walking at same SM’s speed, at 100 metres from CP, so 200 metres from SM;

- S will be, if walking at a half of SM’s speed, at 50 metres from CP, so 150 metres from SM;

- S will be, if walking at a quarter of SM’s speed, at 25 metres from CP, so 125 metres from SM.


We don’t have one crossing point (CP) but 3 CPs. CP1, where Smithman crossed with Peter, CP2 where he crossed with Martin and CP3 where he crossed with AS.

We have seen that there’s 17 metres between CP1 (Peter) and CP2 (Martin).

This means that when SM is crossing with Peter in CP1:

- If Martin was walking at same speed as SM, then Martin would be 17 metres from CP2, so 34 metres from SM;

- If Martin was walking at a half of SM’s speed, then Martin would be 8.5 metres from CP2, so 25.5 metres from SM;

- If Martin was walking at a quarter of SM’s speed, then Martin would be 4.25 metres from CP2, so 21.25 metres from SM;

Peter, who is standing exactly where SM is standing, would be at the referred distances from Martin.

So the distance between Peter and Martin would be 34, 25.5 or 21.25 metres (distances shown above) depending on whether they’re walking, respectively, at the same, half or a quarter speed of what SM was.

The distance between them would be maintained as we’re assuming that both Peter and Martin are walking at the same speed:

Peter and Martin would be relative to each other, at same speed:

at half speed:

at a quarter speed:

The exact same reasoning can be made between CP1 (Peter) and CP3 (AS). The distance between both is 28 metres, so when AS, at the third and last CP, is crossed by SM:

- If walking the same speed as SM, Peter is 56 metres ahead of AS.

- If walking at half of SM’s speed, Peter is 42 metres ahead of AS.

- If walking at a quarter speed, Peter is 35 metres ahead of AS.

These distances tell you, EXACTLY, the distance in which the whole Smith family was spread out depending on the speed they were walking relative to Smithman's.

If at same speed:

If at half speed:

If at quarter speed:

The faster they walked relative to SM’s walking speed the further apart they were. The slower, the nearer.

This distance will always be bigger than the distance between CP1(P) and CP3(A), as for it to be the same they would have to be standing still!


Now, we just have to put all in motion:

If at same speed:

If at half speed:

If at quarter speed:


The opening comment suggests that AS was probably surprised by Smithman as she came up the stairs. We tend to agree.

Peter speaks of Smithman only when this man is on his right, and Martin first speaks of him when he's in the middle of the road after crossing Peter.

It's quite irrelevant whether any or all Smiths were surprised by Smithman. What is important is whether Smithman was surprised by the Smiths.

In a surprise party it's evident the person being paid the homage will be surprised but it's also an undeniable fact that all those who planned it and those who accepted to participate in it, aren't.

That night the Smiths' only agenda is to get home. At the other end of Rua da Escola Primária.

But Smithman has a specific and criminal agenda.

Whatever reason made the Smith Sighting happen, Smithman is intentionally obstructing justice in an event involving the death of a 4 yr old girl.

For those us who are absolutely sure that the encounter was intentional, the event was concocted so that an abductor would materialise, a character absolutely essential for the abduction thesis.

For those who stubbornly still say the Smith Sighting was accidental, they say it was to take Maddie's body somewhere.

Either way, obstructing justice. Either way Smithman knows he's doing something absolutely CRIMINAL.

There's no middle ground when it comes to the Smith Sighting.

The Smiths are lost in their thoughts. Smithman is fully alert.

The distances between them all are huge and it's difficult to visualise how a group of people would communicate with each other. Did they speak loudly or shout to each other?

The children would be chatting and possibly noisy so Smithman could have heard the group before he saw them and so could have avoided them, possibly without being seen.

A group of 9 in good spirits after a night out wouldn’t be silent and adults would be giving instructions to the children to get them safely over the roads, probably holding their hands.

The ONLY hypothesis for the encounter to have been accidental is for Smithman, Gerry McCann, to be carrying Maddie's corpse in his arms.

So it's quite irrelevant when Smithman sees AS or Martin Smith. What REALLY matters is when does he see Peter Smith, the front-runner of the “Smith Family Convoy”.

And, if when Smithman sees him, if he's able to react, if he has time to react, if he has the possibility to react.

That is what determines whether the encounter was accidental or not, because if he had time and the possibility to escape contact then if it happened, as it did, then it can only be because he didn't want to avoid it.

Not because he couldn't but because he wouldn't.

We will represent where Smithman is, at the various relative speeds, when Peter Smith is at CP3, at the top of the stairs, perfectly visible from Rua da Escola Primária.

If at same speed:
If at half speed:
If at quarter speed:
As can be seen Smithman has 10, 40 or 100 metres to escape contact if the Smiths are walking at the same, half or a quarter speed as he is.

The shortest of the 3 distances is when Smiths are walking at the same speed SM is: 10 metres. 11 yds. 12 to 13 steps. 33 ft.

To see if it's enough, we'll ask you to do an exercise.

One that we all, shamefully, have done at one time or another: who hasn't been surprised by someone, in the street, in a shopping mall or wherever,  who we don't want to see? Who we immediately tried to avoid?

In that situation didn't we immediately desperately look for somewhere we could go? We just dashed into the first opportune place we could.  

We certainly didn't need 12 to 13 steps to react. So why would a man criminally holding the body of a dead child be unable to react in such a distance?


Panic makes one do stupid things indeed. For example, in desperate situations it makes one trample over others. But one does this for a reason: safety. One acts irrationally to seek where one thinks safety is, sometimes with disastrous results.

If he was in panic, Smithman would have either quickly backtracked his steps or would run towards the stairs on his left. He does neither.

What is certain is that even in panic he most certainly wouldn't “run” towards the Smiths because that's exactly where the threat is.

He walks normally towards the Smiths. Call it what you may just don't call it panic.

10 metres, 11 yds, 33 ft. BUT ONLY, as said, in the case the Smiths are walking at the same speed he was. Any slower this distance, as can be seen, is greater.

40 metres, 44 yds, 131 ft, to the stairs on the left if they're walking at half of his speed. With other options: Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz on the left and an unnamed street on the right.

100 metres, 109 yds, 328 ft, to the stairs on the left if the Smiths are walking at a quarter. With other options: alley on the right, Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz on the left and an unnamed street on the right.


We obviously don't know, for certain, at what speed either Smithman or the Smiths were walking.

However we can make an educated guess. We know the Smith family “convoy” was made up of 9 people:

From the EXACT locations of the sightings, and by the people who reported them, we can deduce that the party was broken up into three groups:

- 2 Adults - Peter Smith (23) and wife (age unknown), in the front, setting up the pace, as she was feeling ill.

- 2 Adults and 2 Children - Martin Smith (58), wife (age unknown), two grandchildren (6 and 4), following the front party, grandparents taking care of their grandchildren, walking as fast as a 4 yr old would allow.

- 3 Youngsters, (13, 12 and 10) probably staying back and playing games with each other on their last night together in the Algarve.

The 9 people could have been separated differently. All we have for certain is that Peter and his wife are part of the first group, Martin Smith and wife part of the second and AS part of the third.

Irrelevant of where they are located we know the group contains an adult feeling ill and a 4 yr old. And we know the whole group is walking uphill.

So we have to compare the speed between an adult male, carrying a burden (14.5kg - 18kg / 32lb - 40lb) and walking downhill with a woman feeling ill and a 4 yr old, both walking uphill.

We also know that if the speed was the same, the Smith family covered in an area of 56 metres. That's just over 2 tennis courts. It's not a reasonable distance for 3 groups to have separated into after having left a bar and just gone up stairs with a woman in the front feeling ill .

We think that when we say the Smiths could  be walking at a quarter of the Smithman's speed, we are exaggerating. We think the Smiths were walking slower than that.

But, as always, you be the decider. We think we have given you all the information you need to decide.


Smithman surprised the Smiths as they were probably too absorbed in their thoughts, problems and interactions to pay attention to a man coming down Rua da Escola Primária.

Smithman was not surprised by the Smiths. He saw Peter Smith at a distance that would not render him actionless and much less optionless He had time (represented by distance) and many option (alley on the right, Rua Ema Vieira Alvernaz on the left, an unnamed street on the right and stairs on the left) to avoid contact.

Smithman encountered the Smiths because he decided not to avoid the contact.

About where do the PJ Files say that Smithman stopped.

The answer to that question is: nowhere.

But we never said it did. We were very clear that it was Sky News that reported it.

Sky News, April 07 2008:

Martin Smith, from Drogheda in Co Louth, was on holiday in Praia Da Luz with his family when they bumped into the man just before 10pm on May 3 last year. The Smith family's suspicions were aroused because the man made no response when they asked if the barefoot child was asleep. "He just put his head down and averted his eyes, which is very unusual in a tourist town at such a quiet time of the year," said Mr Smith.”

It seems to us that the phrase “...when they asked if the barefoot child was asleep means clearly that either Martin Smith or his wife asked Smithman a question.

Sky News is supposedly not tabloid. This hasn't been denied or corrected.

We don't know the exact wording of the question but it's an educated guess that it was either “Asleep? or Is she asleep?”

IF the Sky News report is true, then Smithman did stop long enough and with close enough proximity to be asked by a total stranger (Martin Smith or his wife) if the dead body (which we know wasn't the case but just stating if, after all this, you still “insist” on believing the encounter to be accidental) of the child he was holding was asleep.

We did not take into account this eventual short-stop when calculating the distances linked to Smithman v Smiths relative speeds.

Post Scriptum: The blog will now be breaking for Easter. We wish all our readers a very happy one.


  1. Smithman's night stroll through the streets of Luz HAD TO BE INTENTIONAL ! Why walk with a child in his arms, late in the evening, in the direction of where are many pubs and restaurants, if not to be spotted by passers by (and hopefully later remembered by those people)? It just happened to be the Smiths, but it could have been anyone, other tourists or even portuguese people (locals). All that mattered was to be seen, a man carrying a motionless blonde 3 to 4 year old girl, a girl that would be all over the news in the next couple of hours, vanished, supposedly abducted by a stranger!
    What better validation of abduction by a stranger than eyewitnesses coming forward the next day saying they had seen a man carrying a girl that fitted Madeleine's description, going towards the beach?! (boat waiting, escaping to Morocco, etc.)

    1. Why?

      Well, he could have just been a man walking home. That is, after all, the most likely explanation.

      Someone ''wanting to be noticed'' would make themselves a bit more noticeable. After all, it was weeks before the Smith party even put two and two together.

      It's a ridiculous idea. Anyone who thinks it through, sees how ridiculous it is.

    2. Anonymous 12 Apr 2014 09:15:00,

      Please explain in what way Smithman would make himself “a bit more noticeable” more than running directly into the, literally, the middle of 9 witnesses carrying a girl in all similar to Maddie?

      A T-shirt saying “Just Abducting…”? A cap with stating “Abductor’s Union”?

      Or maybe just tell the Smiths “Nice specimen of a girl I just abducted myself, eh? There are more like this one, in the Ocean Club if you’re interested… Hey, just in the room I found this one there were other two!!! Can you believe it?”

      The fact the Smiths only came later had more to with the fact they were paying attention to themselves and not to strangers, like Peter Smith says, “he did not notice those details as his pregnant wife was somewhat ill and he was constantly attending to her, not caring about observation of the individual”.

      But the timespan you refer, is very strange indeed. In times everyone who saw a blonde little girl on the street headed straight to the nearest police station (or so the tabloids report, mind you) it took some weeks, like you say, for the Smiths to come forward.

      Please read the following posts:

      Add to this that Gerry made an appeal for Irish tourist to come forward:

      About “Well, he could have just been a man walking home”, what an egotistical man carrying his daughter through the streets barefooted and only with flimsy light pyjamas on a chilly night. So chilly that even Tanner had to borrow a fleece.

      We recommend you read:

      Any more comments with insults like ridiculous won't be published. You have your own blog to do that.

    3. Well, it was bad luck that Smithman just happened to bump into a family of absent minded people, that take a long time to put 2+2 together...and also "bad luck" Smithman did not bump into any other holiday makers...were the Smiths the only people out at that time?! No one else, not one single soul has crossed paths with Smithman, no one else came forward saying they've seen a man with a child. Why? I bet that after passing by the Smiths, Smithman quickly vanished from the streets, returned "home", this time taking care not to be spotted by anyone else, his "task" fulfilled with success, or so he thought. How lucky, bumping into such a large group of people, so many witnesses, "it's in the bag"!

    4. If the child had been wrapped up then it wouldn’t have been obvious it was a girl or that she was wearing pyjamas or she was sleeping.

  2. I don't think Gerry McCann stopped at all. He may have slowed slightly but it appears as if it was one of those instances when someone says something to a passer by such as, 'Ooh, isn't it cold today?' To which the person would usually respond while still on the move. 'Yes, not half.' Or, 'Yeah, bloody freezing.'
    It certainly does appear as if he wanted to be seen, I definitely agree.

    On a different point. With all the recent bullcrap being spewed out by Officer Dibble of the Yard via our honest-to-goodness MSM, regarding that lawless, wild-west-type of place called Praia Da Luz, what with its thieves, druggies, perverts, stalkers, paedophiles, alcoholics, child-snatchers (and that's just the bin men!!), a thought occurred to me.


    Throughout all this sorry story, I have only ever heard of one CCTV camera on the side of some hotel, I think, which was on the route that 'Smithman' sauntered along but when they got round to checking it, it had been wiped clean (surprise, surprise).

    So okay. That's one camera. But surely, if all those stories of lawlessness were remotely true, just about every building within a country mile would have been fitted with one.
    It sort of proves that poor old PdL has very unfairly been given a bad name, if only to HELP the real culprits of the crime.

    1. I think it's a well known fact that CCTV cameras capturing images on the public highway are not permitted in Portugal. The CCTV footage that is captured is on private land and focused on things such as car parks, hotel entrances etc.
      Hences, because it was weeks until the PJ acted on this, the tapes from the single camera which could possibly have captured any footage - it was focused on a car park - had already been re-recorded.

      No mystery, all well covered in, amongst other things, interviews with Mr Amaral

    2. In Portugal there are very strict laws concerning individual privacy. CCTV is for internal security and has to be visibly signalled and the whoever filmed warned. The most common sign is the "Sorria, está a ser filmado".
      The cameras must be turned to the inside of the property. and capture as little of the outside as possible. That's the reason the Paraiso pictures show very little of the exterior.

    3. "Sorria, está a ser filmado"

      Smile, you're being filmed

  3. Hello Textusa

    Just to draw attention to these 2 DM news:

    'Mummy, I want to go home now': The heartbreaking first words of missing toddler dubbed the 'Australian Maddie' found alive 42 hours after she disappeared

    Read more:


    Monstrous cover-up: How the Liberal party, police and MI5 concealed MP Cyril Smith's industrial-scale child abuse

    Read more:

    Thinking that somehow they help to strengthen some of your arguments on Maddie case and all the circus around it.

    1. As regards the first case, it's too early to make any comparison

      In the second, there is nothing to connect the disappearance of a small female child and the well-documented behaviour of a dead politician in a different country with a penchant for young boys

      Neither strengthen any of the absurd theories on this site

    2. Anonymous 12 Apr 2014 09:19:00,

      Connection isn't paedophilia in our opinion, but the tendency for government agencies to cover-up is.

      And let's wait and see the outcome in the Australian case.

    3. Anonymous 12 Apr 2014 09:19:00

      Ahahah ... If you think this site theories are so absurd why do you waste your time reading them and interfering in the comments?!... Are you feeling uneasy?... Why?!...
      It´s a proven fact that there is a "tendency for government agencies to cover-up"...
      Being so, at least the second case isn´t but a reinforcement of some of Textusa lines of investigation.

    This has a camera and interview with Paul Luckman

    and you can see that from the top of the road the Smiths would have been seen or heard by Smithman!!! No question about it. A decoy child was used, no question about it!

  5. Where did G sneak off to when he had been seen? Was someone waiting to collect the child from him at some point in his journey? RoB? Do you think G had anyone in mind spotting him before he set out? And why did no-one else see him?

    1. Anonymous 12 Apr 2014 17:06:00,

      Apologies for only replying now.

      To answer your questions you just have to understand what the intention was and how all was planned to happen.

      Understand that and then see where it went wrong and how they reacted to the sudden change of plans.

      PdL is a touristic town, so in early May at 9 -10 pm, it’s completely deserted. The only place where one could be noticed would be going somewhere with people outside or with some movement at a time when most people are in their homes.

      That would be “PdL’s Red Triangle” (please read our “EastEnders, WestEnders & NoEnders” post (01May10)

      The area nearby Kelly’s and Dolphins. That is where Gerry was heading towards when he heads down Rua da Escola Primária.

      The idea was for Gerry to be seen carrying a blonde girl so someone was to confirm that an abductor had been seen.

      We think the plan was, at around 9 pm, Gerry would take Maddie’s body to its first location nearby.

      Return to 5A, where Tanner would be waiting with her daughter, sedated and dressed like Maddie.

      Gerry would exit the apartment and Tanner go to the apartment where the T9 kids were sleeping, all sedated.

      Gerry would head towards “PdL’s Red Triangle” and assure he would be seen by someone. If he was seen earlier on, the better.

      Once seen, return to the building, hand back Tanner’s daughter at the apartment where she was with the kids.

      Go to apartment 5A, simulate a break-in and head to Tapas and be noticed there. It wouldn’t be a problem for 5A to have an open window for the next 2 hours as no one was inside it.

      At around midnight, the group would return home and be “surprised” by the jemmied window and set the alarm then.

      All would have perfect alibis and an abductor had been seen on the other side of town.

      That was the plan which Kate mistimed by raising the alarm while Gerry was still walking about.

      This meant that Gerry had to hasten his return and instead of going to the apartment where the kids were, he returned directly to 5A.

      The creases on the bed near the door indicate that a small child was laid there with her head towards the door as we showed in our “Mistaken Identities” post (01Oct10).

      The rest is history.

      So to answer your questions.

      Your question: Where did G sneak off to when he had been seen?

      He went down the stairs and as he had his mission accomplished he most likely hid momentarily in the road that exists in the middle of those stairs. He had no reason any more to head towards the “PdL’s Red Triangle”, he had already been seen

      Your question: Was someone waiting to collect the child from him at some point in his journey?

      Tanner was waiting for him in the apartment where the kids were, explaining why she wasn’t in 5A when Kate went there. If she had been, she would have calmed Kate down and all would have gone according to plan.

      Your question: RoB?

      Tanner, as explained.

      Your question: Do you think G had anyone in mind spotting him before he set out?

      Don’t think so. The idea was to be seen. By heading to the only place that had movement, it was most likely to find a Brit as Portuguese locals are not restaurant / bar frequent clients.

      Your question: And why did no-one else see him?

      PdL is a deserted town in early May at night. Plus it would be unlikely for him to have been seen by anyone, even in August, in the route between 5A and where the sighting happened. The crossing with the Smiths happened by chance. Once it happened there was no need to look any further to find more witnesses.

    2. My ONLY problem with this is that why Gerry would 'risk' being seen and possibly identified later? Seems like he wore his own clothes and didn't try to disguise himself at all - although darkness and limited street light and a child almost obscuring his face might be disguise enough? It's a rather audacious move - deeply cynical and desperate. And to think he had allies in all of this. Extremely creepy. Given the time between then and now and what has happened with the Fund, etc and the tissue of lies on TV and in Kate's book, one can only look on open-mouthed and the criminality of it all. Keep up the great work!

    3. Anonymous 13 Apr 2014 10:53:00,

      We have dealt with your question in our “To Be Or Not To Be Even A Question” post (18Sept10).

      Insane says that Smithman didn’t make much of an effort to be noticed, so he who isn’t noticed cannot be recognised. That’s according to Insane.

      We say he was noticed because he did make an effort to make himself noticed. Smithman forced his contact with the Smiths.

      However, one thing is to be noticed, another is to cause an impression to the point of being physically rememembered. We all cross many people in a day and don’t remember any.

      And that is the whole point: it was not “asked” of the Smiths to remember who they saw but only to see ONE man (any man) holding ONE blonde girl (any blonde girl that would later become Maddie due to the news) and, if possible, notice that the girl was wearing pyjamas.

      If Gerry (Smithman) was asked to draw an e-fit of the Smiths that night, he wouldn’t be able to do it. And we say he forced the contact, so he knew the exact importance of this “meeting”.

      The encounter was too short to grasp details. To Gerry he encountered a family of 9/10 people with an Irish accent. He might have grasped the general characteristics of some of the Smiths, for example, the pregnant woman, but he wouldn’t be able to tell her apart from other pregnant women in a line-up.

      Also, Mr Amaral states very clearly that from description of the encounter made by the Smiths, it would be IMPOSSIBLE to produce e-fits with such detail as those that were shown in the UK Crimewatch.

    4. Yes! I read your post now and see what you mean. In many ways Gerry had nothing to lose by causing this confusion, and everything to gain by creating a decoy and planting the seeds of abduction.

    5. Agree! Only what is remarkable is remembered and in this case what was remarkable was a man carrying a girl who looked like Maddie.

    6. What about Jane Tanner? If she's in on the cover-up why would she time her sighting of a man with a child at 09.15 on 3rd May, yet only report it the following day - the day AFTER McCann was wandering the streets with her daughter? Why?

    7. Anonymous 14 Apr 2014 12:12:00,

      First, thank you for resubmitting your comment NOT published at 13 Apr 2014 19:12:00. As you see, if you submit comments in a respectful and polite manner they will be published.

      Second, by stating “If she's [Tanner] in on the cover-up” you openly reveal the true intent of your question and exactly on which side of the fence you sit on. Not many of you out there so far from the fence on that side as it's common understanding that Jane is up to Rob's borrowed fleece involved in the cover-up, as much as any other T9.

      Third, we don’t understand your question. What has the timing (at 09.15 on 3rd May) to do with when she reported it? The question you seem to be asking is why didn't Tanner time her sighting around the same time as the Smith sighting? As Gerry had returned and said, I've been seen by an Irish family, why didn't she make sure her timing fitted in better? Please clarify if you will because the way it's put, we don't understand what is being asked.

      Fourth, thank you for pointing out that the following day was the day AFTER the Smith Sighting. Before helping us any further, let us tell you that we’re fully aware that two days afterwards would be two days AFTER, three days afterwards would be three days AFTER and so on.

      Fifth, the question is not why report it only the following day but to understand why didn’t she report it immediately to the parents even before authorities were called in.

      We have explained, sufficiently for now, what we think about Tanner’s Sighting in these 2 posts: (30Oct10) (01Nov10)

      By the way, and not saying you are, doubting that Tanner didn’t see a man that night is to call SY liars.

      In UK CW they don’t say Tanner didn’t see anything but do say that Tanner did see a man who wasn’t Tannerman but Crèche Dad, a British citizen the Met has questioned, as well as his family, to come to that conclusion.

      So, according to Tanner (and the McCanns by maintaining Tannerman on the website) she saw, from the street, Tannerman abducting Maddie; according to SY, she saw, from the street, Crèche Dad taking daughter home after picking her up from night crèche and according to us she saw, from inside apartment 5A, Gerry carrying a dead Maddie to a nearby house before starting his walk with Tanner’s sedated daughter in his arms in the direction of “PdL’s Red Triangle” in which he was seen by the Smiths in the Rua da Escola Primária.

    8. Thank you for the reply.
      First, I don't know what you mean by 'the true intent' of my question. It seems a perfectly innocent querie to me.
      Second, my pevious comment was polite as far as I recall.
      Third, to reiterate. If the Tapas plan was to parade the 'sedated' child of JT through the streets of PDL at 10 pm, no mean feat requiring much composure and nerves of steel considering the potential consequences, why would Tanner report a completely different sighting at 09.15. The Tapas 'plan' was for 10 .pm. and it was succesfully carried out. McCann was seen.
      Fourth, I emphasised the word AFTER because the Tapas group would have known by then that the cunning plan was a stunning success. All they had to do was sit back and wait for the Smiths to report it. They didn't know the Smith family would take so long. So why would Tanner come alng with a complete red-herring? Just asking.

    9. Anonymous 14 Apr 2014 20:19:00,

      Who says “the Tapas 'plan' was for 10 pm”?

      If it’s your authorship, please explain how you reached that conclusion. If it’s not, please ref the source.

    10. McCann was seen at 10 pm with child - Tanner's child? Kate raised alarm at 10?
      Plan was for 10 pm.

    11. Anonymous 14 Apr 2014 22:48:00

      So the T9 plan was to raise the alarm when Gerry was not present?

    12. Someone (Insane) has lost the plot...

    13. By your own reckoning, if McCann was parading Tanner's daughterthrough the streets at 10pm, and Kate sounded the alarm then yes - they raised the alarm when Mccann was not present. This is what you suggest, isn't it?

    14. Anonymous 20 Apr 2014 21:36:00

      Yes, that is exactly what we said happened, in our opinion.

      However we say the alarm, at 22.00, was raised prematurely (exactly because Gerry was out and about) while you said the alarm, at 22.00, was raised according to plan, which, in your opinion, was successfully executed.

      So will ask again if, according to you, the T9 plan was to raise the alarm while Gerry was out?

    15. It's hard to see how a conspiracy that involved meticulous planning between a group of people could go so pearshaped at the exact time of execution ie. 10 pm. By success I mean McCann had been spotted - job done. How could Kate have cocked up so badly by raising the alarm prematurely. Why do you believe this, I find it difficult to fathom.

    16. Anonymous 20 Apr 2014 22:30:00,

      Do not play with words. Explain why you said the raising of the alarm at 22.00 by Kate was part of a sucessful plan.

    17. I'm not saying Kate's raising of the alarm was part of the plan. the 'plan' i.e. to have Mccann wander the streets with Tanner's daughter is your theory not mine. I'm asking if your theory has any credibility why did Kate not wait for McCan to return before raising the alarm? Do you not think she was 'in on it'? Also Tanner who, according to your theory, was certainly involved, why then does she go 'off script' and report a sighting at 9.15 at a time when the conspirators would have been on tenterhooks waiting for the Smiths to come forward with news of the sighting of mccan that was so meticulously planned? It doesn't make sense.
      Incidentally, I am not being supportive of the McCanns. I want the truth of what really happened to Madeleine to be exposed as much as anyone else on this site.

    18. Anonymous 21 Apr 2014 12:55:00,

      Your words: "The Tapas 'plan' was for 10 .pm. and it was succesfully carried out. McCann was seen."

      Don't see where Tanner's sighting at 21.15 conflicts in any way with the Smith Sighting at 22.00 or why is that going "off-script".

      It is our opinion that a man did carry a child (Maddie) going East on Rua Doutor Agostinho da Silva at around 21.15.

      It is our opinion that this man was Gerry McCann. It is our opinion that Jane Tanner happens to be the only person seeing him.

      She sticks to this time because she cannot know then if anyone else (for example, someone on a balcony on nearby buildings) would have seen that man, so she's truthful in describing what she saw and when she saw it. The only lie was to leave out the fact that she knew very well who that "stranger" was.

      Why Kate raised the alarm at 10 and not wait until Gerry had returned is a question that all Black Hats, including yourself, still ask to this day.

    19. thanks for your reply. Two points: first, when Tanner spotted 'abductor' at 9.15 she also passed McCann who was speaking with a tennis-playing pal who verifies McCann's presence. Where does this pal fit in? Is he lying in your opinion? Second, I don't understand your final point as I don't know what a Black Hat is. I do understand why the question about Kate raising the alarm at 10 pm is significant in relation to McCann wandering the streets with a sedated child at that time. Your theory. What do you think?

    20. Anonymous 21 Apr 2014 14:16:00,

      Let’s first look at the first time you placed this question, which was 8 days ago in an unpublished comment:

      “Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Speed":

      Ok, so where does the Tanner sighting sit amid all this speculation? Why would she time her fictitious sighting at 09.15 and keep quiet about it until next day, even though Gerry was out and about at 10.00pm. What would be the point of two sightings at very different times? That is assuming she was in on the cover-up, which is what you believe, Text. Maybe she's not in on it at all, and she did see someone, and the Met have identified him as they say they have. I can't see how JT can be lending out her sedated daughter to be paraded around PDL whilst coming out with a cock and bull sighting which contradicts McCann.

      Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 13 Apr 2014 19:12:00”

      We did not publish this because as it assumes all is speculation what follows can only be rhetorical questions.

      Words “speculation” and “cock and bull sighting” aren’t exactly the expressions used by someone who alleges to “want the truth of what really happened to Madeleine to be exposed as much as anyone else on this site”.

      As we have said, please keep track of what you submit. Not doing so makes you look silly.

      We will wait for you to explain why Tanner’s sighting contradicts the Smith one.

      We have shown how we think Jez Wilkins has lied by showing there were no Tapas dinners so it wasn’t at Tapas that he and Gerry talked around the BRT about the checking system on the previous night.

      We, in our opinion, don’t have any sort of doubt that he lied about that particular conversation, in terms of location (no BRT) and content (no checking system).

      We find it strange why would a man needing to go to a toilet while walking his child to sleep in a stroller, would choose to enter the Tapas complex (which means going up small stairs) and use the clients’ facilities there with said stroller when he could have simply walked back to his apartment, used the toilet, and got out again. No, not saying he’s lying, just finding it strange.

      About his encounter with Gerry, at around 21.15 on May 3, we have every reason to believe it happened.

      We know that, in our opinion, Gerry was obliged to lay the body on the flowerbed on the SW corner of the apartment’s backyard. The cadaver dog signalled cadaverine there. Something, or someone, stalled Gerry on his trip while taking the body out of the apartment.

      For us it’s credible that it would be Jez, indeed walking his child in a stroller. At this point in time, Jez is not in the loop and entertains a natural small talk between people who know each other and cross with one another in the middle of the street.

      You say he and Gerry know each other from tennis, we are the opinion they know each other from other activities.

      Jez does not see Jane because Jane never passed them. Jane sees, in our opinion, the conversation from inside apartment 5A while accompanying, visually, Gerry's trip as according to plan. She sees him being interrupted and speaks of this encounter because she assumes that both Jez (why he doesn't we will say why next) and Gerry would back up her story. Neither do. Probably because neither wanted to compromise themselves with the Tannerman sighting.

      Jez doesn’t see Gerry/Tannerman because Gerry waits for him to get out of sight to go a retrieve Maddie’s body and continue his mission of taking Maddie’s body away from apartment.

      Jez, on the night of the 3rd, is an innocent bystander. But after that night, just like the Tapas staff and other guests, is asked to “confirm” the Tapas dinners and the rasta man. Probably when asked to confirm the existence of Tannerman during the conversation with Gerry, he refused. That would be taking too much part in the lie.

  6. 3/4 million pageviews and growing!! Congratulations to Textusa and her team!! Well done and thank you, ladies!!

  7. English, Gay Comedian uses Carter Ruck !Suicide of young man.18! Teen takes his life at phyciatric hospital,after telling a nurse, the Gay Comedian "Groomed" him!

  8. Today's mail! Liverpool


    TV comedian accused of grooming teenager who killed himself uses top libel lawyer to explain himself to boy's family

    Comedian has contacted Ben Cowburn's family to 'explain' relationship

    But boy's parents spoke of dismay at his use of lawyers, Carter-Ruck

    'We are not used to dealing with media lawyers,' said Sharon Cowburn

    Ben, 18, found dead in 2010 after claiming he was raped by the celebrity

    By Nick Constable

    Published: 23:46 GMT, 12 April 2014 | Updated: 23:47 GMT, 12 April 2014

    A gay celebrity who is alleged to have groomed a teenager before he killed himself has contacted the youth’s grieving family to ‘explain’ their relationship.

    But last night the parents of Ben Cowburn spoke of their dismay at the TV comedian’s use of high-profile libel lawyers Carter-Ruck to make the approach.

    The Cowburns have so far refused to respond, insisting the celebrity – known only as Mr X after a coroner controversially protected his identity – should first be questioned by the Metropolitan Police...

  10. The Aussie girl, Chloe taken hostage because of dad's drug debt.
    The Mcs must be cringing about all those headlines calling her Australia's Madeleine.

  11. THE MET,HA,HA ,HA,HA,HA!Those f****** ,are on the criminals pay rolls!Barrymore walked,when the guy was found drowned on his property,the met have been told to let the mccanns off.
    That lad,the comedian groomed,was given drugs,also drugs with the Barrymore guy.

  12. Unpublished Anon,

    We have, up to now, NOT published 8 comments received from Insane at the following times:
    - Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 15:24:00
    - Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 15:26:00
    - Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 15:29:00
    - Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 20:00:00
    - Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 12 Apr 2014 23:36:00
    - Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 13 Apr 2014 16:06:00
    - Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 13 Apr 2014 16:08:00
    - Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 13 Apr 2014 16:12:00

    - Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 13 Apr 2014 19:12:00

    Add to these, the following 2 published comments:
    - Anonymous12 Apr 2014 09:15:00
    - Anonymous12 Apr 2014 09:19:00

    A rather surprising level of participation for a post. It pleases us. It confirms that we are on the right track.

    In none of these 10 comments does Insane speak about Gerry not making his appeal until after the Smith family had made their statements and that this fact had been published in the media.

    Insane should keep track of what is submitted.

    It’s true that Gerry makes his appeal after the 3 Smiths made their statements. The Smiths come to Portugal in the end of May and the appeal was on June 9th.

    The question being discussed was the timespan between the Smith Sighting on 3 May and the Smiths coming forward weeks later at a time the whole wide world (and we’re not talking about just the internet) was speaking almost exclusively about Maddie McCann.

    The ref about the appeal is linked with the interest shown by Gerry, more than a month later after the sighting happened, for the Irish (and Dutch) tourists to come forward.

    Irrelevant of the fact the Smiths had already spoken or not with the PJ, it’s a fact that Gerry shows unusual interest, more than a month after, in a nationality that by coincidence happens to be that of the family which Smithman crossed with.

    Insane may allege that a local Drogheda rag reports the sighting on June 6th and the appeal is on June 9th. Besides this single piece of news on June 6th, the Smith Sighting is only mentioned again by any media, local or otherwise, in August.

    We will disregard for the moment the fact we’re talking about one single piece of news on a local rag at a time when literally hundreds of thousands of newspapers worldwide (was there a single paper, national, regional or local that didn’t cover Maddie?) were putting out news on the subject.

    Let’s imagine Gerry read it. Why not specify it in the appeal? Why didn't he say something like “we have recently been told a family from Drogheda saw a man carrying a child”?

    And why include the Dutch tourists?

    If he didn’t read the Drogheda rag, then why the wild guess on the Irish?

    1. Textusa, Gerry on his blog entry where he makes his appeal on June 9 speaks of recording Crimecall on that date. You say media didn't treat the Smith Sighting until August. Are you taking into the account the airing of this show? It would be between June 9 and August, right?

    2. Anonymous 13 Apr 2014 23:13:00,

      Gerry says this: "Day 37 June 9th 2007 After returning from the beach we did the Irish version of Crimewatch-‘Crimecall".

      He does not speak of content of the show. And as he, on that day, after the recordings, appeals to unspecific Irish tourists ("there are a lot of Irish tourists" and "we want the Irish public to come forward") we doubt that the program referred in any way the Smiths.

      If proven the contrary, we will obviously acknowledge. We cannot say whether the Smiths were topic or not as we are not familiar with that particular show, nor when it aired.

    3. I'm Anon 23:13
      Tuesday 19th June. Crimecall aired In Ireland (McCann Files timeline) but not in UK.
      The interview extract I listened to doesn't mention the Smith family sighting. The McCanns talk of their Donegal holiday and the support they have received from the Irish people.
      Crimecall starts by saying they don't usually cover crimes outside Ireland, but in this case, they cite family links to Ireland as one of the reasons they made an exception in this case.
      You were right, so need to acknowledge anything Textusa.

    4. Drogheda Independent
      Smiths say they have not been contacted by Mccanns' Private Investigators
      Sun 31.1.08.
      Metodo 3 go to Ireland to interview the Smiths.

  13. First- I believe Gerry trip was intentional. If not, they could choose to raise the alarm much later that evening or on the next morning with another rubbish excuse, for what they are "experts". The alarm time was planned- later enough to trouble the police with the searches on the terrain and later enough to have somebody on the streets, but not many, and specially not locals, who could ruin the plan.

    2- The itinerary of the trip was well planned. Gerry headed that way because he knows he could be spotted by somebody. They were at the end of their holidays. Contrary to what they want the world to believe, I think they spend their nights at the Chaplin's and other pubs. They know who use to be there and up to each time. In a small town on a low
    season, guests tend to have a small rotine, specially if they like one pub or café and not a big offer is available. For me, some of this pubs were also meeting points for swingers.

    3- I tend to believe, Gerry knows the Smiths and their rotines, even if not personally ( I mean, where the Smiths use to go and up to each time they use to be out). He had the help of people knowing well PDL and the Smiths use to spend their holidays there. Murat knows the Smiths because the Smiths highlighted that to PJ when they eliminated him from being the man they spotted. Gerry dennounced that knowledge when, while being bothered by the absence of any evidence of an abduction, he Invited the Ireland family to come forward.
    So many small details play a huge roll to solve that case. It is all there for SY to see, If they wanted. The crime is not anymore " only the mysterious disappearance of a little girl". It is a cocktail of crimes: Disappearence, concealing of a body, geopardizing the investigation, obstruction to justice, deliberated planting of sights and witnesses, corruption, cover up, fraudulent fund, planned misinformation, delapidation of public taxes which could be used to search other missing people who had chances to be found alive if the same effort were applied and so on........

    4- After many years of investigation and after many months after reopening it, SY did not find a usefull argument to dismiss the claim the Smiths made while watching Gerry arriving to UK, the claim of being Gerry the man they saw on the fatidic night carrying a child on the way to the beach. It is like, if SY avoids to touch that subject. The egg man was ridiculous transformed into a dad man carrying his child not from the creche, but on the way to the creche, later night. Dark humor, from SY or the result of being framed against a wall? After years, they produced nothing....but are very cautious when the subject is the Smiths sight.
    Unfortunately, even after having the same opinion as MR Amaral, that the Smiths were crucial, I think now they are already scared by the Mccann's lawyers and the power they tried to pass and their statements will be significantly different then if they were officially invited as witnesses on the early days after May 3, 2007. Unless, they were called by a court in Portugal as witnesses and forced to talk without lying. A witness can't lie in court. A lie changes their status in to arguidos.

  14. Yes, the Smiths must be called to Lisbon by a court. They could play the most important step to solve this case- telling exactely what they saw, without being affraid of the consequences ( Carter-Ruck), or aligning with the rest of the people involved in the game and be part of the cover up. A clever and experient judge must interrogate them and if they are honest, they must help Maddie to achieve justice.
    No matter, who Gerry was carrying that night. If he was seen heading to the beach, while carrying a child later that night, means that what he was doing was after the time the police believe Maddie disappeared. He must have being searching his daughter, looking for help or protecting the twins from any other wrong event that night, IF HE REALLY BELIEVES AND ABDUCTOR TOOK HIS DAUGHTER. Any Judge will question what made him to have that decision and Gerry needs to provide a good explanation, not the usual rubbish delivered by his spoke man or the perverted media.
    Wasn't significant the absolute silence of their family after the case being reopenned? Aunty Phill and the grannies, lost their energy to search they beloved one?

  15. Textusa,
    I don’t subscribe your swinging theory. It makes sense, it’s possible and I agree it would warrant a cover-up. I happen to think there’s something greater to cover-up than swinging: paedophilia.
    You have called it a Stink Bomb and I’m curious about your explanations why you think that.
    I don’t think it’s a Stink Bomb at all and think it’s the big secret behind the cover-up.
    You point the finger at Payne in having to do with Maddie’s death (I recall you being the first to do that in Joana’s) but have minimised all possibility of all this being the lid being kept on a a paedo crime committed by Payne.
    He was identified by Yvonne Martin as paedo, or involved in paedo processes in UK. He was very rude to her.
    The Gaspars identify clearly paedo behaviours in his conversation with Gerry when talking about Maddie.
    Gerry has an empty CATS files.
    He bathed other people’s little children during the holiday where the Gaspars were present. He bathed Gaspars’ daughter, for example.
    He was the last person to see Maddie alive and describes the situation in very strange terms of white angels and all so peaceful.
    There are also other things that make me thing that this is all about paedophilia:
    He is the one that suggests and organises the holiday and he is the one that says who stays in what apartment
    He is the one that doesn’t need to check his children because he has a baby monitor that works great distances and because of this is the only male of the group who doesn’t leave the dinner table.
    He is the one who filmed that moment with Gerry swearing in front of all including children on an airport bus and I think he was the one who uploaded the video on YouTube.
    He was the one that was heard in the rogatory statements after the Portuguese cops had left the UK. All others were heard when they were there. Also I think he says that the right forum is not to be there answering the rogatory questions.
    I think all this points much more to paedophilia than to swinging. So why call it a Stink Bomb like you have?

    1. Anonymous, 15 Apr 2014 19:42:00

      Thank you for your comment

      We fully understand your reasoning.

      Paedophilia is a highly sensitive subject to discuss but not one we wish to avoid.

      It's too complex to answer it adequatey here, so we will do it in a post.

      You have presented your case with logic and reason, so it's up to us to present ours. As always, we will let those who read us make up their own minds about it.

      We would even welcome any further inputs from readers who think that paedophilia is the "big secret" behind the cover-up.

    2. Could it be both...? Swinging and paedophilia...? A swinger can be also a paedo, and vice-versa...

    3. Two things I would like to add about David Payne:
      - Paynes are the only family/couple not represented in 2009 documentary. Jane, Gerry and Matt but no one from the Paynes
      - Paynes don't "appear" in 2013 UK CW. They're only shown arriving at the table but we can't even make out their faces.


    Chloe Campbell was definite target, say police

    Chloe went missing 'after threat to dad' 0:55

    DETECTIVES are closing in on the mystery disappearance of three-year-old Chloe Campbell, declaring she was not taken in a random abduction.

    The youngster vanished from her Childers home last week and reappeared days later, prompting claims she was taken to threaten her ­father Garth Campbell.

    She told friends and family that “daddy’s friends” took her.

    Police have not confirmed the girl said those words but yesterday said there was “no element of randomness” to the abduction.

    “This person has had to go into a house and remove one of three children who were sleeping on a mattress.”



    Man charged with the alleged abduction of Chloe Campbell

    A 45-year-old Childers man has been charged with the alleged kidnapping of Childers toddler Chloe Campbell

    A 45-year-old Childers man has been charged with the alleged abduction of three-year-old Chloe Campbell.

    It will be alleged the man took little Chloe from inside her Ridgway St home in the early hours of last Thursday, before returning her to the Childers Showgrounds 42 hours later.

    The motive for the alleged kidnapping is not yet known.

    The NewsMail understands he was located this afternoon by detectives from the Bundaberg Criminal Investigation Branch.

    He was arrested and charged with Chloe's abduction shortly after 11pm on Tuesday.

    The man, who is a father himself, is facing one count each of burglary, child stealing and deprivation of liberty.

    He will appear in the Bundaberg Magistrates Court on Wednesday morning.


    Chloe Campbell mystery: Police seize parents' clothes

    Why weren't the McCanns clothes seized?

  19. "Speculation is mounting about the involvement of Garth Campbell in his daughter’s unusual kidnapping in central Queensland."

    Know any parent involved in the their "daughter’s unusual kidnapping"?

  20. 45 year old man, Eden Kane charged with abduction. Said not to be known to family and got in through a window.
    The child can't be named now for legal reasons.
    Said to have taken her because he felt sorry for the way she lived.

  21. Stories are being whooshed as fast as I read them.!!
    What's going on?

  22. As Chloe Campbell's case is now subject to legal proceedings.

    Comments may come in which we can acknowledge and but won't publish for this reason.

  23. Gosh, went away for several weeks and it's gone a bit nutty here. Is Insane the same Insane referred to a while back and presume the title is attributed, rather than self described?

    Why so exciteable, I wonder... Been quiet for a good while if it's the same Insane, no?

  24. Came here to read my weekly post and forgot you were on a break. You have become a weekly vice for me!! Please enjoy your Easter!!

  25. Aztec,

    Insane’s nom-de-guerre was given by him or herself. It comes from an Anonymous comment submitted by the character in our Blogeditorial Decision on the "Maddie McCann Case":

    “Anonymous 18 Feb 2011 22:15:00

    Don't be ridiculous, Textusa

    At least four Tapas employees gave witness testimory stating that the McCanns dined there on 3rd May, as did Steven Carpenter, a fellow holidaymaker. Are you seriously suggesting that all these people have conspired together, with the McCanns and their friends to give false testimony?


    Insane is our pet troll. We’re not aware of any other blog having someone exclusively dedicated to fight them. We have. It honours us.

    We have even written a post, “Insane's Plea to Temporary Insanity” (07Mar11), dedicated to him/her, where we highlight how the Tapas staff were singing from the same hymn sheet in the first 24 hours after Maddie had disappeared.

    1. Oh, ja, I like it. :-)
      Bit clingy, though, Insane...

  26. Did I dreamed that he/she (Insane) will create a blog to defend his/ her point of view? Where is that blog? Got lost on his/ her insanity.

    1. Anonymous 18 Apr 2014 18:27:00,

      The link is up on the right column of the blog's front page.

      We have made no charge for this free publicity.

      We gave our word we would put it up if given and that's what we did when Insane finally decided to make it public.

    2. The blog doesn't seem to put forward Insane's view re Madeleine McCann - that I can find, having skimmed through a handful of posts.

      It's as Textusa says - Insane's blog appears to be dedicated to reacting to Textusa.

      Generally abusive, with lots of expletives.

  27. Wishing you a HAPPY EASTER, Textusa and sisters.

    Is it possible that a significant part of british police forces are all dipped in mud?!...


    Madeleine McCann police on trail of five British holiday flat owners - but they are refusing to cooperate

    British detectives want to quiz them over who was in their apartments when the tot was abducted seven years ago

    Madeleine McCann police are trying to trace five mystery Britons who owned flats in the block where she vanished.

    British detectives want to quiz them over who was in their apartments when the tot was abducted seven years ago.

    But we can reveal all five – whose identities have been withheld from police under Portuguese data protection laws – have allegedly refused to allow managers at the Algarve complex to pass their details to the Scotland Yard’s Operation Grange team.

    A source said: “They could hold vital clues to what happened. But it is down to the individuals if they want to get involved.

    “They were all asked by email if they were happy for their names to be put forward to the investigation – and they said they were not.

    “It may be that they did not want to get caught up in such a high profile case, but they could know something critical about Madeleine’s disappearance and may not even be aware of it.”

    Police are working on the theory that three-year-old Madeleine’s abductor spied on her from inside the 59-block Ocean Club complex of holiday flats in Praia da Luz.

    Nearly all of the owners at the time were believed to be British and it has been claimed some properties may have been sub-let during May 2007 without the owners’ knowledge.

    Anybody with access to certain ¬apartments could easily have kept an eye on the McCanns’ movements without ¬looking suspicious.

    Madeleine’s dad Gerry has said he thinks they were being watched throughout their family break in ¬apartment 5A.

    Officers are believed to have ¬questioned owners of all but five of the remaining 58 flats after they agreed to help the investigation.

    They have pinpointed the mystery leaseholders as “persons of interest” who could help them unlock the case although none are suspected of wrongdoing.

    But Scotland Yard has been hampered by a combination of data protection regulations and the botched original Portuguese investigation.

    It is understood that a full list of owners was never made available even to local police.

    Sub-letting at the complex has made ¬detectives’ work even harder as they try to build a picture of who was where at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance.

    Our source said: “Operation Grange is trying to gather data through several agencies to collate a full picture of who was at the resort at that time.


    1. "and the botched original Portuguese investigation."

      how conveniently it is always forgotten that it was not just a portuguese police investigation...there was a team of british police working with the PJ during the whole investigation, they only left Portugal when the McCanns left (fled...)!
      I ask, if it was a "botched" investigation, WHO botched it...? WHO sabotaged the investigation...? Note that the british police officers that were in Portugal "helping" the investigation were NOT in Portugal to help find Madeleine or what happened to her...they proved they were not when they left the country with the McCanns. If they were here to find Madeleine they would not have left, not until the investigation was over. By leaving Portugal in block, "escorting" the McCanns, they showed who they were really in Portugal for, what their "cooperation" with the PJ was really for...protecting the McCanns, NOT helping to find a missing child !

  29. cont

    “They are working hard to gather this information as quickly as possible and have appealed for full co-operation from everybody involved. But they are having to tread on eggshells.

    "They would happily go round Praia da Luz and knock on doors asking everybody for information if they could.

    “But they are still waiting for ¬permission on the international letters of request they have sent to the ¬Portuguese.”

    The formal letters are used to ask the Portuguese police to carry out certain pieces of work on the British force’s behalf.

    “The frustrations at Scotland Yard are growing day by day,” said our source.

    “The Portuguese police just keep referring them to what is in their files and that is not the full picture.”

    A source close to Madeleine’s heartbroken parents Gerry and Kate said: “It is deeply disappointing that these five owners have chosen not to come forward.”

    A spokesman for Mark Warner, who own the Ocean Club, would only say: “It has been our policy not to comment on the Madeleine McCann case for a quite a few years now.”

    Madeleine’s parents are now preparing to mark the seventh anniversary of her disappearance on May 3.

    Detectives are believed to be preparing to make critical arrests in the case as soon as they are given the green light to act on Portuguese soil by judges.

    A source said: “It seems there is lots of evidence still to work through.

    “If they are finally given permission to act it will be the Portuguese police making the arrests alongside the Met and it will be the same when it comes to the questioning.”

    Clarence Mitchell, a spokesman for the McCanns, said: “Kate and Gerry will not comment on any operational detail concerning Grange. It is purely a matter for Scotland Yard to pursue.”

    1. So basically, SY wants to know what was going on in 5 apartments and owners won't tell. According to Mirror, that is.

      Well, now the spotlight seems to have shifted towards apartment owners.

      First the Burglar trio, then Monteiro a former Ocean Club worker, then Ocean Club workers being the burglars, then Ocean Management hiding burglary information and now uncooperative apartment owners.

      Anyone else see a sequence or is it just us?

    2. “The frustrations at Scotland Yard are growing day by day,” said our source. "

      Good! They are tasting a bit of their own remedy! Mr. Amaral's investigation also suffered an immense frustation at the lack of cooperation from the british authorities...remember the rogatory letters saga...? The long wait for response over the medical and finantial records of the McCanns?

      I say, let them wait "till the cows come home" !

    3. One can only hope...the spotlight will go from apartment owners to...apartment renters! Certain apartment renters,in the Waterside Gardens block 5, from the 28th April 5A, 5B, 5D, and 5H...

  30. Mystery people contacted by e-mail, that must be a first. Would someone please provide SY with Jack-the-Ripper's mail?
    Where's the criticism about the silence laws in Portugal now? Then the McCanns said they wanted to speak but couldn't because of those Portuguese laws so why won't they speak now?

    1. I'd rather not hear them speak because it's only lies that comes out of their mouths.

      This pair must be the only adults in this country who don't have a CREDIT CARD and a bank DEBIT CARD.

      Amazingly, this is the response the PJ received after requesting their credit and banking history. You literally can't function financially without these, especially a DEBIT CARD. Even back in 2007.

      I shake my head in disbelief at some of the lies which they have told, and what others have told on their behalf.

    2. How on earth did Gerry manage to get his wallet stolen as he was using an ATM machine in Waterloo station if he DID NOT have any bank cards?! What the heck did he put inside the ATM card slot? Or the McCanns are sooo special that even ATMs give them money just on voice request?!

    3. 'Huh, ask the ATM machine, Sandra.'

      Gerry McCann 2007.

      (Or was it, 'Huh, ask the DOGS?)

  31. What a rubbish attitude from SY- it is everything, everyones fault, always blaming others:

    - "the Botched portuguese investigation", when the british were on it since minute one and even brought to Portugal top dogs with a golden nose to snif blood and cadaverine but they forgot to train the dogs for convennient results " what they find is only valid and acceptable if connected to a strange of the group or parents. 100% accepted if an infime shadow of possibility pointed the nose of the dogs to a portuguese working in the Resort.

    - The poor cooperation of the owners of the flats. What a stupid excuse, specially because was largelly publicized in 2007, the existence of a list of british Paedos living or visiting the Algarve but hidden from the portuguese authorities due to identity protection. Properties in Portugal are registered and it is easy to know to who belongs any property. Asking that is not a violation of anything and did not require any permission. SY trying to fool the british readers because their investigation produced nothing and they have to stick with what the joined investigation achieved in 2007 and is on the files.
    Personally, I believe a flat / house owned by a british holds some keys to solve that case since all indicates that the body was moved from 5a to a different location before being transfered to the scenic ( one house/ flat or more then one) and for obvious reasons, I believe this was done with the permission of the owner or with the permission of who had the keys of that properties.
    Mr Amaral said that all neighbours and flats were investigated and visited by the police on the first days, but since the all involved in the case are proven liars and the OC was made of flats spreaded around PDL and they were probably the source of the list of flats provided to PJ, will be not a surprise if they don't include on the list given to PJ the most important flats for the investigation. Then, obviously there is flats with interest and SY just don't quiz the owners if they don't want. Refusing to cooperate with the police is obstruting the investigation, even because neighbours can talk and give the picture the police is looking for, like Mccann's neighbour said to PJ, she found strange why the back gate of the scenic was left open at night.

    - The portuguese Judge who is not giving a green light to the rogatory letters and the iminent arrest. Another rubbish. The private detectives have been in Algarve knocking on everyones door and bothering workers and neighbours with questions. Nobody prevented them to do it and they were not charged with any illegality. Then, who is preventing SY to do the same and find the girl? Only their strategy to pretend they are investigating when in fact they are just playing with the media a convennient game to clear the Mccann's and do nothing to explain what happen to their daughter.

    Is everything in PJ Files, that is the main message to retrieve from all shameful british articles.

  32. Unpublished Anonymous at 21 Apr 2014 01:09:00

    The reason we're not publishing your comment is because we don't want to condemn all contributors because of the actions of some. Hope you understand.


    Madeleine McCann’s Parents Get Fresh Hope as Operation Grange IDs 20

    Barbie Latza Nadeau

    Buoyed by the escape of three Cleveland women held for a decade, Madeleine McCann’s parents now have a new lead: 20 ‘persons of interest’ who may have details of her 2007 disappearance.

    It is hard to imagine the roller-coaster nightmare that Madeleine McCann’s parents must be going through. Six years have passed since Madeleine, then just shy of her 4th birthday, disappeared from a vacation apartment in the Algarve, Portugal, where she and her younger twin siblings were asleep. Her parents, Kate and Gerry, were considered primary suspects early on in the investigation by haphazard Portuguese police who focused erroneously on the couple from the moment the young girl disappeared, likely letting the real suspects escape justice. They also have been chastised in the court of public opinion for leaving their young children unattended in the gated community while they dined with friends at a tapas bar about 50 yards away, even though the adults took turns checking on the sleeping children every half-hour. They have endured a nasty Internet hate campaign, with Kate receiving regular death threats. Their hopes have been raised by numerous sightings of their daughter on German airplanes, Spanish campgrounds, and New Zealand supermarkets, only to be dashed as each lookalike child proves not to be young Madeleine.

    Now the McCanns have been given a new reason to be optimistic. They were bolstered earlier this month by news of the Cleveland trio of kidnapping victims who escaped alive after a decade in captivity. “Their recovery is also further evidence that children are sometimes abducted and kept for long periods,” the McCanns said in a statement after the Ohio case came to light. “So we ask the public to remain vigilant in the ongoing search for Madeleine. Our thoughts are with the women in America and their families.”

    Over the weekend, they were given even more fresh hope after Scotland Yard investigators, reviewing the work of the Portuguese police under a multimillion-dollar shadow investigation called Operation Grange, said they had pinpointed more than 20 “persons of interest” who may have vital information about Madeleine’s disappearance. The list includes many previously known characters, including a troupe of British freelance cleaners whose white van was spotted in the area when she disappeared. But there are also plenty of new names on the list, including a middle-aged mystery couple who supposedly rented a flat near the McCanns during the same period in 2007. The couple, whose names have not been released, told Pamela Fenn, who lived above the McCann rental apartment, that they had opened the unlocked door to the McCanns’ apartment the night before Madeleine disappeared to comfort the young child, whose cries were allegedly audible from their own apartment.


  34. cont

    According to Fenn’s statement, it was well known that the McCanns had made it a habit to dine nearby after they put their children to bed, but it was also a common practice by other holidaymakers in the secure gated resort. It also was reportedly common knowledge that the young child’s cries were heard on more than one occasion when her parents were out, according to Fenn’s statement, which is in the Portuguese dossier and thus subject to Scotland Yard’s review. Fenn, who died two years ago, told Portuguese police about the couple, but because police were so focused on the McCanns as suspects, they apparently did not find the mystery couple’s alleged interference with the missing child relevant. Now Scotland Yard officials reportedly are urging the Portuguese police to reopen the case and find both the mystery couple and the British cleaners. Because of jurisdiction issues, only the Portuguese police can make arrests in the case, which has been officially closed in Portugal since 2008, making it vitally important that they reopen the case to pursue any new evidence laid bare by the Operation Grange detectives.

    The British detectives also have pointed to a number of undocumented laborers worth checking out, from clandestine maintenance workers to seasonal gardeners who were working in the black-market economy and who may not have been sufficiently vetted to work in a family resort. And there were reportedly a number of apartments in the resort that were rented out under the radar to avoid taxes. Those renters would not have had to register their passports to stay on the premises.

    The McCanns have not given an official statement on the news of the new suspects in the case, but according to British press reports, their spokesperson said they were optimistic about the news: “They have been encouraged from the moment the review started and are now greatly encouraged that police have drawn up a short list of people who they believe are of interest to the inquiry.”

    But like so many of the false starts and abrupt twists and turns of this six-year saga, not even the best new leads will mean anything until the McCanns have their daughter back—or at least find out the truth about what really happened to her the night she disappeared.

    1. Anonymous 21 Apr 2014 08:14:00,

      Interesting to see an article written in 20May10 which may explain the recent article about SY trying to get details of homeowners.

      We think the mystery couple, who apparently RENTED, aren't so much of a mystery to everyone.

      If one is to believe Fenn lived in the apartment above 5A, it seems this couple, who were GUESTS, were so disturbed by Maddie’s crying that they exited their own apartment, went around the building (front door unless open ajar needs a key to be opened), walked into 5A via backgate, up the stairs and sliding doors and soothed Maddie and then returned to their apartment and even with all the media hype, never told the police about this.

      First obvious detail, is that Maddie cried really, really loud.

      So, like we said in our “All Paths Lead to Rome” (20Nov10) it is rather strange that none of the T9 heard Maddie cry on the “checking” they say they did. “Checking” that never happened as there were no Tapas dinners.

      Second, it begs the question, where does this “mystery couple’s” soothing episode fit in the 75 minutes of Maddie’s uninterrupted crying, according to Mrs Fenn.

      Was there other crying episodes? Why did Mrs Fenn report only one?

    2. Did Mrs Fenn also report seeing David Payne on the McCann's balcony at 7pm on the night Maddie disappeared, when she spoke about the soothing couple?

    3. How could Mrs Fenn listen to a child crying loudly for such a long time, when all she needed to do was call the OC 24 hour reception? The child could have been injured. Or she could have gone down to check,in case there was somebody with her. I find this story difficult to believe.

    4. Mrs Fenn didn't exactly tell the truth.. She Initially told the press it was nonsense that she had said anything to police, after making a statements then fails to report the soothing couple incident or Paynes balcony appearance, as recently revealed by Mr Amaral, when she did make her statement.
      What made her decide to say more later?

  35. Mrs Fenn said nothing of the kind to the press. She stated on camera, on the only occasion that she spoke at all, that she had never spoken to the press, and that it was entirely fabricated.

    Nor did she at any point claim to have seen or spoken to this hypothetical ''soothing couple''. Perhaps you can provide a reference to Mr Amaral claiming this, and if he did we can discuss why he waited until 6 years had gone by, and Mrs Fenn had passed away, to mention it?

    1. Insane,

      We have never said there was a soothing couple. Daily Beast is the one who speaks about this couple and saying that Mrs Fenn informed the Police about them:

      “The couple, whose names have not been released, told Pamela Fenn, who lived above the McCann rental apartment, that they had opened the unlocked door to the McCanns’ apartment the night before Madeleine disappeared to comfort the young child, whose cries were allegedly audible from their own apartment.
      According to Fenn’s statement, it was well known that the McCanns had made it a habit to dine nearby after they put their children to bed, but it was also a common practice by other holidaymakers in the secure gated resort. It also was reportedly common knowledge that the young child’s cries were heard on more than one occasion when her parents were out, according to Fenn’s statement, which is in the Portuguese dossier and thus subject to Scotland Yard’s review. FENN, who died two years ago, TOLD PORTUGUESE POLICE ABOUT THE COUPLE, but because police were so focused on the McCanns as suspects, they apparently did not find the mystery couple’s alleged interference with the missing child relevant.”

      Daily Beast is a US news reporting website founded by Tina Brown, editor of Vanity Fair and New Yorker

      We only noted that if the couple did go and soothe Maddie, then it wouldn’t fit with Mrs Fenn’s story.

      Mr Amaral does not make any ref to the “soothing couple”.

      Anonymous 21 Apr 2014 09:29:00, speaks of “…or Paynes balcony appearance, as recently revealed by Mr Amaral”. Anon is referring to the fact that Mr Amaral clearly stated on CMTV that Mrs Fenn has said that she saw David Payne on the balcony of apartment 5A around 19.00, on 3 May.

      That is not on Mrs Fenn’s statement. So it can only be because she decided to say more later as anon says.

      “Why he waited until 6 years had gone by, and Mrs Fenn had passed away, to mention it” is a question that only Mr Amaral can answer.

  36. ..."the secure gated resort"

    What? Where? Which?!

    NOT the Ocean Club, for sure!

    And, as for what Mrs. Fenn said or did not say, she is on record in video, for ever and ever, saying...she never uttered a word! (whatever that might mean...)

  37. Why didn't Crimewatch mention the soothing couple if it was known in May?

  38. To new readers, this is what we have written related with Mrs Fenn:











    25Feb 12




  39. 89 comments and not one contesting the content of the post!


    British media slammed for “rehashing” Madeleine stories

    As the 7th Madeleine disappearance anniversary approaches, a British newspaper has been slammed for publishing an ‘old story’ masquerading as a new lead.

    The Daily Mirror reported on Saturday that detectives “working hard” on Operation Grange are trying to trace five mystery Britons who owned flats in the block in Praia da Luz from which Madeleine vanished on May 3, 2007.

    It is a story that first appeared in 2013, in the same paper - although then detectives were only looking for FOUR apartment owners.

    Said one critic, a retired British policeman who has been closely following the Metropolitan Police investigation since it began nearly three years ago: “Is this really the sum total of another year’s ‘hard work’?

    “Has Scotland Yard spent another million, eight more visits to the PJ and a whole year - NOT finding out who owns those apartments? Honestly?”

    According to the policeman, the source for this latest rehash story - “as well as all the others that have preceded it” - is the McCann’s press spokesman, Clarence Mitchell.

    In 2008, Mitchell was described by former Portuguese police federation chief Carlos Anjos as a man who “lies with as many teeth as he has in his head”.

    “Mitchell is still clearly in charge of this rubbish”, the retired policeman told Algarve Resident. “Why does no one expose him?”

    This latest criticism came on the same day that the Algarve Resident received a call from local people in Luz asking us NOT to make any reference to the looming anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance.

    “Every year it is the same”, the principal caller complained. “We are really appealing to you to not carry anything on the day. Just let it pass. If things go on as they are, newspapers will still be writing about this story in 25 years time!”

    It is a valid point, but as a recent story on attitudes in Praia da Luz showed (see our printed edition of April 2, or opinions on the mystery remain divided.

    Much as locals may wish for an end to the media spotlight, interest in the story remains astonishing - hence the never-ending repeat revelations, particularly in the British media.

    This latest by the Mirror centres on the apparent unwillingness of the five British apartment owners to cooperate with Operation Grange.
    And a new message within the body of the text highlights "the frustrations" that are reportedly growing every day between British police and their Portuguese counterparts.

    Says the Mirror, Grange detectives are “having to tread on eggshells”.

    “They would happily go round Praia da Luz and knock on doors asking everybody for information if they could, but they are still waiting for permission on the international letters of request they have sent to the Portuguese”.

    One point, however - mentioned both in the ‘new’ story over the Easter weekend, and the story published by the Mirror in 2013 - is that Madeleine’s father Gerry McCann has said he feels the family were being watched throughout their fateful holiday.

    “If that truly is the case”, said the retired policeman in touch with Algarve Resident, “why on earth would he have left his children asleep on their own in the holiday apartment?”

    Seven years on, over seven million euros spent on Operation Grange - not to mention money being ploughed into the reopened Portuguese police investigation - and despite all the ‘new’ stories, no one appears to have any answers as to what really happened to three-year-old Madeleine McCann.

  41. Mrs Fenn was part of the gang involved with the cover up. All points to her be a good friend of Murat's mother. Then, not hard to believe, she knows other british people living in PDL, where I include TS and the guy that handed the church keys to the Mccann's, which was not the catholic priest. We just need to read attentivelly all that was delivered by papers, investigation and some characters, during all this years and connect the dots. Now, the picture is quite clear. If SY did not see it, it's only because they don't want to.
    I think, PJ will be clever enough to give time, with a lot of pacience, for SY to get knot on their own rope. When all the avenues become closed what will be left? THE EVIDENCES LARGELLY KNOWN BY BOTH POLICES AND AVAILABLE SINCE THE FIRST MONTHS. Mrs Fenn is a master piece on the cover up....very undestandable, why she did not provide everything she knows to the police at the beguining . She was used to deliver what was more convennient.
    Did somebody believe that anyone enter a flat, even on holidays to calm an unknown child? NON. Unless they know the child and the family. Unless they were there to share the same type of holidays- swing. Should we imply that Mrs Fenn and the US paper were pointing to swing in the resort, even without clearly saying it? Too much couples around in a low season.


    Posted by algarveresident on June 23, 2005


    There is nothing quite like a traditional, English church fair held under sunny skies, with home-made cakes, jam, assorted stalls and games, plus that unique community friendship guaranteed to make everyone happy.

    Visitors and stall holders alike agreed that ST VINCENT’S ANGLICAN CHURCH did all this and more at their event held on June 11, on the main lawn under huge palm trees and around the courtyards of the Eiras Velhas estate in Almadena. Altogether, JUST UNDER 400 PEOPLE ATTENDED the event, with 23 different traders and stall holders taking part.

    Fundraising co-ordinator Les Johnson and his wife Christine, together with an enthusiastic team of helpers from the Luz/Lagos area, did a brilliant job in making it all happen. Nostalgic music was provided on the keyboard by Nick Downs, while Oz Shade Sails provided welcome shade in the food courtyard adjoining the PlantScape garden centre.

    The Eiras Velhas resident art group, formed by Rosamunde Gale and under the tutelage of Brendan West, put on an exhibition showing the wide range of subjects and media used in their twice weekly sessions.* For those wanting a perfect lawn, John Cowan chose the event to launch his range of artificial grass. Elsewhere were gifts from India, books old and new, patio furniture, plants, ladies’ fashion and, of course, traditional white elephant stalls.

    ST VINCENT’S LOCUM ASSISTANT CHAPLAIN, FATHER HAYNES HUBBARD, HIS WIFE SUSAN and children Gabriel and Sebastian, put their full energy into the day. Although occupying only a brief tenure, FATHER HAYNES, whose parish is in Ontario near Niagara Falls, inspired HIS LUZ CONGREGATION and was clearly a hit among visitors to the fair. He has now left for pastures new and we wish him and his family well.

    St Vincent’s Christmas Fair will be held for the second time at Eiras Velhas on November 26, and those interested in taking part should contact Les Johnson on 918 966 015.

    For more information on art classes, whether beginners or experienced artists, contact Brendan West on 282 788 516 or Rosamunde Gale on 282 697462.

    MY COMMENT: Please note date of article: June 23, 2005

    1. Anonymous 22 Apr 2014 08:55:00,

      Thank you very much for the link!

      Very, very interesting. It seems Rev Hubbard was not that much of a stranger to town making the coincidence of arriving just after Maddie's disappearance less of a coincidence.

      Strange thing is then why did the Hubbards require Kate's help in settling in? They knew Luz better than she did certainly...

    2. 2005!!!
      Weren't we all told/sold the tale that Rev Haynes was assigned to the Luz parish in May 2007?!

      The article clearly nominates Haynes as the "ST VINCENT’S LOCUM ASSISTANT CHAPLAIN" and Luz as "HIS LUZ CONGREGATION", and all this in 2005! Unless the date in the article is wrong, this is quite damning for Rev. Haynes...why make believe he arrived at Luz in 2007, when it seems he was there alredy in 2005 as the assistant priest to the Reverend that left in 2007 (can't remember his name now, an older man)?!



    SCOTLAND YARD detectives are trying to find a middle-aged couple said to have entered Madeleine McCann’s holiday apartment to comfort her because she was crying, we can reveal today.

    By: James Murray
    Published: Sun, May 19, 2013

    It is believed they entered the bedroom on May 2, 2007, the evening before Madeleine disappeared from the Ocean Club at Praia da Luz on Portugal’s Algarve.

    The tip-off was given by two key witnesses who were reinterviewed as part of the Yard’s two-year, £4.5million investigation.

    It is already known that Pamela Fenn, who lived directly above apartment 5a, heard a child, believed to be Madeleine, crying for about an hour on the evening of May 2.

    She was so concerned she rang a friend in the village to ask what to do and considered ringing Portugal’s Policia Judiciaria.

    At the time, Madeleine’s mother Kate and father Gerry were dining with friends at a tapas bar some 50 yards from the apartment.

    A source said: “Police were astonished when this new information came to light. Officers spoke to other key witnesses to discover more about the middle-aged couple.

    “Apparently they were concerned about the crying and went to see if they could comfort the girl.”

    Pamela Fenn has since died, so police have been speaking to other people who were staying in the same apartments.

    Our revelation comes as Scotland Yard detectives say there are potentially 20 suspects they want to speak to. Retiring Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell, head of the Yard’s Homicide and Serious Crime Command, urged Portuguese authorities to investigate the new leads.

    He said: “There are a lot of people of interest. There are people who could be properly explored further, if only to be eliminated.”

    Scotland Yard officers have been interviewing witnesses here for months, although the public prosecutor in Portugal has decided against reopening the investigation.

    Despite claims of a “Mexican stand off” between Portuguese police and Yard officers, the Sunday Express understands there is in fact very good co-operation between both squads.

    Pedro de Carmo, deputy national leader of the PJ, said yesterday: “We still co-operate with their team. There are good communications.”

    Portuguese officers are very impressed with the diligence of the Met investigation and have been impressed with their interviews with witnesses in Britain.

    We can confirm that a couple staying in the same block as apartment 5a were interviewed last February.

    They were in their apartment on the night Madeleine vanished. Afterwards they wrote an account of what they saw but were never formally interviewed by Portuguese detectives.
    They had been at a restaurant earlier in the evening and left at about 9pm.

    On their way home they walked directly past the entrance to the Ocean Club pool, where the “Tapas 7” (the name given to the friends eating with the McCanns on the night Madeleine disappeared) were enjoying the meal with Kate and Gerry.

    They walked past apartment 5a but noticed nothing untoward. The woman said in her statement: “I stood on the balcony at about 9.15 with a whisky.


    1. I remember reading (once upon a time...) that one night, some Ocean Club staff had to go and fetch the McCanns from Chaplins bar, because of other guests complaints about crying children in 5A. I bet that if anyone entered the Mccanns apartment to sooth the children, they were probably O.Club staff, not other holidayers...

  44. (cont)

    “I saw people eating at the tapas bar and children in the play area. We went to bed at 10pm-ish. We were woken up by our bell ringing at 11.30pm. It was a friend of the McCanns, saying that a little girl had been abducted. The friend asked if we had a computer so they could get the media involved in the search.

    “Two police were on the corner of our block, one lady said that off-duty police had come and were searching. We did see single men on mobiles while we were out who could have been police.”

    The couple took part in the search for Madeleine and then returned to their apartment.

    The woman’s statement continues: “We walked back up towards our apartment, a group had gathered on the corner. The McCanns were in bits, he was crying on the shoulder of a friend.

    She was screaming: ‘The f*****g bastards have taken her’. Finally, at around 4am, we said: ‘Is it OK if we go to bed?’ We directed this comment towards a man in a white shirt and jeans, who seemed to be authoritative.”

    At the couple’s home here, two Yard officers questioned them separately for three hours and got them to sign lengthy statements. They further interviewed them this year to double check their information.

    The couple are key because at precisely 9.15pm on May 3, Jane Tanner, a friend of the McCanns, said she left the tapas bar and walked past Gerry, who was talking to holidaymaker Jez Wilkins outside apartment 5a.

    Neither Gerry nor Kate said they saw Jane. She reported that she had seen a man carrying a child, believed to be Madeleine, walking across the top of the road.

    At the time she had not realised the significance. Officers asked the couple if they saw Jane, Gerry or Jez but they insist they did not.

    The Sunday Express has visited the couple’s holiday apartment, which looks over the tapas bar. From its balcony you can see directly into the garden of apartment 5a.

    The woman said: “We have one of the best views of the whole block. We are sure of the timings. If we had seen anyone we would have remembered.

    “We will continue to answer the Yard’s questions. We have given our fingerprints and DNA. We were happy to assist. They should be left to get on with their inquiries.”

    1. Dear, oh dear...

      It seems mystery "soothing couple" is indeed a mystery. Who we thought they could be, it turns out, they aren’t. A mystery "soothing couple", that is.

      The ones who we thought they were turned out to be just another 2 people who saw mystery "soothing couple" go into 5A: “The tip-off was given by two key witnesses who were reinterviewed as part of the Yard’s two-year, £4.5million investigation.”

      So, no question about it. Mrs Fenn and this couple saw "soothing couple".

      “Soothing couple” exists. If you believe this couple and Mrs Fenn,

      Taking into account the visibility of apartment 5A’s front door, "soothing couple" could have only be seen entering apartment via sliding doors.

      So, no question about the fact that Maddie must have screamed her lungs off, poor girl, making “soothing couple" go around the building just to… "soothe" her.

      Not very good at soothing children, are they? This if one is to believe in Mrs Fenn’s words, that is.

      So many people who were supposed to hear Maddie cry that night but didn't while so many others did.

      How strange.

      How so "innocent"

  45. Interesting thing we have found on Facebook:

    Aletheia's footsteps

    ADAPTED from some information researched by 'Badger', member of the The Maddie Case Files Forum, a while ago. Please not that some of the information maybe no longer current or has changed.

    GERRY McCANN plays golf at ROTHLEY PARK GOLF COURSE, where the Manager is a DANNY SPILLANE. Danny worked in Portugal and knows a chain of people known to each other, who have some connection to the McCann’s. This may be of NO significance but the McCann’s were supposed to have NO CONTACTS in Portugal.

    Turning professional at 17, Danny Spillane moved from Lingdale to ROTHLEY PARK, where under the then Club Pro Peter Dolan he completed his training becoming one of the countries youngest qualified Professionals at 20 years old. Several Pro/Am successes and a County Assistants championship were won during this time.

    From ROTHLEY to PORTUGAL, where a role of teaching professional at the Parque da Floresta resort was Danny’s next port of call. This role progressed to him becoming the Director of Golf overseeing the resorts £1 million turnover at the age of 24. Whilst in Portugal, Danny helped to run the Henry Cooper Charity Golf Classic and controlled a £1.5 million renovation to the course.

    Danny joined ROTHLEY PARK GOLF COURSE as the Head Professional in the Spring of 2002, changing roles to Club Manager in 2009. Danny helped raise over £3,000 for the McCann’s FIND MADELEINE FUND as part of the Rothley Park Golf Club’s Centenary celebrations, completing 101 holes of golf in a day.

    DANNY SPILLANE’s wife, SAMANTHA, is Director of S J EVENTS and hosted an event for a McCann campaign.

    “It was a joy to have SJ Events helping us with our event. The team were incredibly thorough, highly organised, calm and great fun to work with. What could have been a very stressful occasion was turned into an enjoyable and highly successful one. Each member of the team went above and beyond what would be expected and looked after us all so well. We are incredibly grateful to Sam and all at SJ Events and would not hesitate to recommend them to anybody wanting to hold an event for whatever cause. Truly brilliant!”

    A snippet from a [removed] SUNDAY EXPRESS article mentioning GERRY playing golf at ROTHLEY

    "At least once a week, usually on a Monday, Gerry plays golf at ROTHLEY PARK GOLF CLUB and then pops in for a pint at the Woodman’s Stroke pub in the village. He also takes the twins to the park. Occasionally on Sundays the whole family goes off to visit friends David and Fiona Payne eight miles away in Leicester. However, apart from their weekly walk to church, it has become very rare to see Gerry and his wife out together – not that anyone should read anything into that. Kate insists: "We are stronger than ever."

    FRANK ARTHUR SHARPE (also from Leicester) has DANNY SPILLANE as a friend on his Facebook page.

    FRANK SHARPE is Managing Director of GARDEUR DIRECT, Rua Direita, PRAIA DE LUZ
    Here is an entry into a race run by the McCANNs (not published): Gardeur Praia da Luz £50.00 (+£14.10 giftaid) 25/3/11

    FRANK signed the McCANN iPETITION as did LINDA SHARPE his wife. They have three children one of whom is a journalist for ALGARVE RESIDENT and who wrote some articles on Madeleine McCann, including one on REV.HAYNES HUBBARD.


  46. (cont)

    Other friends on Facebook include ADAM BUNNEY, BOB BEASON and DEAN RICHARDS

    FRANK SHARPE has LEICESTER TIGERS as his favourite team on his FB page, who likely play SALE SHARKS which BRIAN KENNEDY (double glazing) owns.

    BOB BEASON also has Leicester Tigers on his FB page. He played for Tigers and was also a Director.

    DEAN RICHARDS was named in the 5 day break Six Nations Golf a couple of years ago and was a director of Leicester Tigers. Known as Deano he was an ex police officer and rugby player who played for Leicester Tigers.

    “Spire Leicester Hospital provides excellent private healthcare to patients from across the East Midlands and beyond.”

    He appears on both Bob Beason and Frank Sharpes Facebook page as friends, he and his wife are a singing duo and in the ALGARVE. On searching their web page there is a comment from JOHN GERAGHTY:

    “I just want to congratulate you for providing fantastic entertainment at BOAVISTA golf club annual prize giving. As Captain it is important that the members feel that they have enjoyed themselves and you both made the whole event very special. Keep your diary open for we shall be calling again. Have a great Christmas and a working New Year”

    John Geraghty A 68-year-old businessman from Leicestershire who now lives on the outskirts of PRAIA DA LUZ. Offered to store the McCanns' hire car so that they could commission independent forensic tests.

  47. Yes and isn't Frank Sharpe accountant for Vigia Group whose flagship resort, Parque da Floresta was named Best Four Star Development in Portugal? -And isn't Andy Burridge, Vigia’s Sales and Marketing Director the one whose wife found a bag of clothes on the way to Faro airport which supposedly contained items from Madeleine ?
    One big happy family

    1. Anonymous 22 Apr 2014 22:06:00,

      Thank you for your comment but we must make a correction to it: Nancy Burridge did NOT find the bag on the way to Faro airport.

      That bag was said to be a media invention by Inspector Teresa Almeida, in correspondence with Interpol, which is in PJ files.

      Nancy handed in a bag of clothes found elsewhere, as did Daniel Keown.

    2. The journalist who wrote he article about the Faro bag knows who the source is. Journalists will protect sources, but whoever wrote it should now be considering why the source came forward with such a detailed account of the bag's contents.

    3. Hi
      Thanks for the correction - apologies for misleading and thanks for the update

  48. Rachael was in the apartment, sick on Wednesday night.
    She says conversations could be heard in 5a so crying loudly certainly would be.
    She doesn't say anything about hearing Maddie crying nor speaks of soothing couple.
    This contradicts Fenn and the couple that told Fenn they went in apartment.

  49. Breaking news and on the MET web site : Grange had 500 responses to a March appeal for info after the news of sexual assaults in the Algarve on Brit white children [ Sky news said all 500 from UK although appeal went out in Germany and Netherlands].
    They have some new reports of assaults, 5 plus one " near miss". Sky say SY focus is on the assault on a 10 yr old in PdLin 2005. Reported to holiday rep but not to police [ very strange..]
    It is hoped that Grange detectives will be in Portugal very soon to work with their Portuguese counterparts.

    1. Anonymous 23 Apr 2014 12:07:00,

      Thank you for the info.

      Not exactly a new story:

      It seems it's only taken 5 years to recycle this story, with some minor variation. Just in time for May 3rd.

    2. Edgar says JT is a reliable witness and it could be the man she saw!
      Sky news have a picture of Tannerman! So Crechedad is the 2005 suspect?

    3. What happened to Smithman and the withheld e-fits? Tannerman is back on Sky News.
      Crechedad, make sure you have an alibi for 2005 and 2007!

    4. I'm sorry... I'm lost!
      Is this Binman?

    5. Piltdown man?
      Neanderthal Man?
      Robert Zimmer Man?
      Or Gerry McCann Man?


    Following an appeal in March, officers from Operation Grange investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have had a positive response to the appeal which has led to a number of new lines of enquiry.

    Detectives overseeing the investigation specifically appealed for further information leading to the identification of a suspect who may have been responsible for a potentially linked series of twelve offences on the Western Algarve region between 2004 and 2010

    As a direct result of a media appeal made on 19 March the investigation team subsequently received over 500 calls. Information from those calls has led to the identification of six new cases involving children. These six are in addition to the twelve that had previously been brought to their attention.

    These new cases are similar to a number of the originally identified twelve offences whereby a male intruder has gained access to holiday villas occupied by UK families in the Western Algarve.

    Of the six new cases, all but one had been reported to the Portuguese police at the time of the offence. Five involve sexual assaults on children and one was a ‘near miss’. Of particular interest to the team is that one of the new sexual assaults took place in Praia da Luz in 2005.

    Sufficient characteristics between the cases lead them to now believe that 18 matters in total concerning children may be potentially linked.

    Three incidents that took place in Praia de Luz - between 2005 and 2010

    Five incidents that took place in Carvoeiro between 2004 and 2006

    Nine incidents that took place in the Praia de Gale, Vale de Parra, Sao Rafeal (Albuferia district) between 2004 and 2008

    One incident that took place in Vilamoura in 2005, a new offence which has come to light since the March appeal.

    Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, the senior investigating officer said: “I’m encouraged by the new information that has come to light as a direct result of the appeal in March. There has been a huge public desire to assist us with our investigation and I would like to thank those who have provided us with new information.”

    Anyone with any information is asked to call the Operation Grange incident room on 0207 321 9251. Alternatively if you do not want to speak to us directly you can contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

    The Metropolitan Police Service continues to offer a reward of up to £20,000 for information leading to the identification, arrest and prosecution of the person(s) responsible for the abduction of Madeleine McCann from Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007.


    Following today's press conference the following material can be embedded on to your website.

    A sound clip from DCI Andy Redwood detailing the latest update following the Madeleine McCann appeal in March 2014.

    Thing Link - interactive map detailing the latest update on the Madeleine McCann appeal - locations of 18 potentially linked cases.

    The map detailing the location of the 18 potentially linked sexual offences against minors in the Western Algarve, Portugal is available from

    1. Apparently the 2005 case was only reported to a holiday rep. If a child had been assaulted in 2005, how come her parents didn't come forward when Maddie went missing?

    2. Smithman being sidelined? Maybe this Speed post has showed SY that there's no question as to exactly who he was.
      And what he was doing.

    3. Did I hear it right today on my radio? 5 new cases on top of the other 12 reported in the CW update? 17 cases? Algarve the new paedo-heaven?


    New Sighting: Couple mistake kebab shop owner for missing Madeleine McCann!!!

  52. ...é só pedófilos ingleses a amar crianças inglesas………...

    Mais seis casos de crianças inglesas atacadas no Algarve


    PJ rejeita investigação conjunta com britânicos ao desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann

  54. I am totally sickened by this latest round of cr*p from the msm and sy. I actually cannot read it anymore. And, tragically, I am finding that the pictures of poor Madeleine herself are affecting me adversely. The photographs of the child have become synonymous with the actions of the parents and all the bullsh*t published. How much longer can this be allowed to continue??

    1. absolutely agree - feeling the same way and wishing there was a way in which we could make a difference


    Casos foram descobertos após um apelo público feito através da comunicação social.
    23 de Abril 2014, 12h45

    A polícia britânica revelou esta quarta-feita ter identificado mais seis casos de crianças inglesas atacadas sexualmente no Algarve, reforçando a convicção de que terá existido um pedófilo nos anos próximos ao desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann.

    Estes casos foram descobertos após um apelo público feito através da comunicação social, em março, relacionado com outros 12 casos assinalados anteriormente e que o detetive inspetor chefe Andy Redwood disse hoje terem um "número suficiente de características em comum", nomeadamente o método ou hora, para fazer acreditar que estejam relacionadas.

    "O intruso não força a entrada nas casas e nada ou quase nada foi roubado", referiu hoje num encontro com jornalistas, aos quais revelou que desde março receberam mais de 500 novos telefonemas.

    Ao todo, a Scotland Yard tem registo de 18 casos que envolvem crianças inglesas "brancas" com idades entre os seis e 12 anos, dos quais nove foram ataques sexuais concretizados e três estiveram quase, mas não chegaram a acontecer.

    Três tiveram lugar na Praia da Luz, entre 2005 e 2010, cinco no Carvoeiro, entre 2004 e 2006, nove entre a Praia da Galé, Vale de Parra e São Rafael, no concelho de Albufeira, entre 2004 e 2008, e um em Vilamoura, em 2005.

    Andy Redwood, que chefia a 'Operação Grange', a investigação do desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann a cargo da Polícia Metropolitana britânica, adiantou que quatro dos casos não tinham sido reportados às autoridades portuguesas e mostrou-se interessado em saber pormenores sobre um incidente em particular, verificado no centro da Praia da Luz com uma criança de 10 anos.

    "Não voltei a Portugal desde o último apelo, em março. Claramente, uma das coisas que estarei interessado em fazer no próximo encontro com a equipa de investigação [da Polícia Judiciária] do Porto é saber o que fizeram com toda esta informação", afirmou.

    O responsável garantiu que todas estas novas descobertas foram partilhadas com a PJ, mas que só teve acesso a alguns dos processos de investigação das autoridades portuguesas, e admitiu que existam processos "perdidos" nas polícias locais que não sejam conhecidos pela PJ.


  56. cont

    "Queremos consultar todos os processos para acrescentar à nossa investigação", justificou.

    Na altura do apelo público feito pela Scotland Yard em março, fonte da PJ confirmou que a pista de um alegado pedófilo "corresponde à linha de investigação descoberta pela equipa da PJ liderada por Helena Monteiro" e que "a reabertura do inquérito" judicial surgiu na sequência da investigação de um suspeito.

    "Essa linha de investigação foi dada a conhecer à polícia inglesa e aos pais de Maddie [Gerry e Kate McCann], em reunião realizada em outubro de 2013, nas instalações da PJ, em Lisboa", referiu.

    Esclareceu ainda a fonte que "o inquérito continua aberto e a PJ prossegue a investigação com a reserva e discrição que a tem caracterizado", acrescentando que "a identificação de cinco situações com idêntico 'modus operandi' permitem admitir como possível que estes crimes tenham sido cometidos pelo mesmo autor e que este possa estar relacionado com o desaparecimento de Madeleine".

    Em outubro, a Scotland Yard deu conta de uma série de linhas de investigação e retratos-robô, nomeadamente de um homem visto a transportar uma criança pequena nos braços na noite do desaparecimento na Praia da Luz e de uma série de homens de cabelo claro vistos a rondar as imediações do apartamento onde a criança inglesa estava alojada.

    Porém, não obteve qualquer informação que permitisse esclarecer aqueles avistamentos, nem descobrir quem levou a cabo uma série de roubos no complexo turístico naquele ano.

    Madeleine McCann desapareceu poucos dias antes de fazer quatro anos, a 3 de maio de 2007, do quarto onde dormia juntamente com os dois irmãos gémeos, mais novos, num apartamento de um aldeamento turístico na Praia da Luz, no Algarve.


    DETECTIVES hunting the ¬kidnapper of Madeleine McCann are poised to make arrests.

    By: John Twomey
    Published: Thu, April 24, 2014

    The breakthrough comes after they identified new ¬incidents where British girls were targeted by a lone ¬paedophile in Portugal.

    nine cases in the Algarve girls were sexually assaulted, it has been revealed. Now an elite unit of Scotland Yard officers is ready to fly out to support wide-ranging operations by the Portuguese police.

    Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry, who are convinced their little girl will be found alive, welcomed the news yesterday.

    Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said: “Whatever needs to be done on the ground in Portugal needs to be done as effectively and swiftly as ¬possible.”

    Metropolitan Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner ¬Martin Hewitt confirmed the authorities in Lisbon have responded positively to a series of “international letters of request” from the Yard.

    He said: “In the relatively near future, we will start to see activity on behalf of the Portuguese with us involved as potential suspects in connection with 18 incidents.

    They need to be traced, interviewed and eliminated so inquiries can focus on the most likely offenders.
    It is understood Portuguese police have DNA from at least one incident.

    The speeding up of the investigation comes less than two weeks before the seventh anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance from the McCann ¬holiday apartment in Praia da Luz on May 3, 2007 when she was three.

    A source close to Kate and Gerry McCann, both 45 from Rothley, Leics, said Met officers hoped to be “on the ground in Portugal” for the first time since the squad was formed “within a fortnight”.

    He said: “It appears the Yard have X, Y and Z they want to interview out there but they won’t have the power to do it themselves.

    “Any arrests and formal interviews will be conducted by the Portuguese police with Met officers sitting in.”

    The Yard squad first identified a prolific paedophile as a potential ¬suspect last month after a major appeal through newspapers and BBC’s Crimewatch.

    At the time, 12 incidents on the Algarve were connected to him, two in Praia da Luz.

    The new cases have been added since the appeal, which prompted more than 500 calls and emails.

    In particular police heard from a 19-year-old who was sexually assaulted by a lone intruder at a holiday home in the “heart of Praia da Luz” in 2005 when she was 10. It is thought she may have only recently told anyone about her ordeal.

    Yard detectives are focusing on 12 of the incidents – nine sex assaults and three “near misses”. The other six incidents happened further away or years after Madeleine was snatched.

    All the victims were white, British, aged between six and 12 and were attacked between 2004 and 2006. The paedophile – described as smelly and pot-bellied – crept into their ¬bedrooms without forcing entry.

    He spoke ¬English with a foreign accent, was tanned, with short, dark, unkempt hair, and reeked of tobacco, stale aftershave or alcohol.

    During two incidents, he wore a ¬burgundy long-sleeved top. One ¬witness said it had a white circle on the back. Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, head of Operation Grange, said several features of the description, the type of offences and the way they were committed point to a lone offender.

    Scotland Yard is offering a reward of up to £20,000 for information leading to the identification, arrest and prosecution of the person or persons responsible for the abduction of Madeleine McCann.

    If you have information call the Operation Grange incident room on 020 7321 9251. Or contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

  58. News Headlines
    More suspicious news headlines have been spotted in the UK and Portugal.
    They were previously spotted in October, but have recently been reported again as new suspects.
    New arrests to follow old arrests.
    SY hope to find more headlines before the month is out.
    A spokesman said "These new headlines have given us the best leads so far. We are currently working on promising new headlines."

  59. Smithman has been abducted!
    This promising lead from Crimewatch hasn't been seen since.
    Crechedad is now back and is to be questioned about whether he saw Smithman. Or whether he was Smithman.
    More Ripping Yarns ahead.

  60. Is 3 AR’s lucky number and he uses it in multiples?

    12 houses unlocked
    12 British white kids
    12 to 6 years of age
    9 of which were implemented and
    3 sexual assaults were almost, but did not actually happen
    18 incidents in total registered
    12 offences on the Western Algarve region
    Between 2004 and 2010 = 6 years

  61. Looking at the met office website today: (

    Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, the senior investigating officer said:
    "I'm encouraged by the new information that has come to light as a direct result of the appeal in March. There has been a huge public desire to assist us with our investigation and I would like to thank those who have provided us with new information." Anyone with any information is asked to call the Operation Grange incident room on 0207 321 9251. Alternatively if you do not want to speak to us directly you can contact Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.

    The Metropolitan Police Service continues to offer a reward of up to £20,000 for information leading to the identification, arrest and prosecution of the person(s) responsible for the abduction of Madeleine McCann from Praia da Luz, Portugal on 3 May 2007.

    It is just sickening. Is this a very blatant cover up or whitewash? Or are SY playing a game? Either way, it is disheartening to be a UK citizen right now.

    1. HelenMeg,

      Hopefully after tomorrow you won't feel that disheartened.

      For now, we don't see any reason for you to feel that way nor any reason to antecipate our Friday publication routine.

    2. Thanks Textusa - even apart from anything else - its good to know you are there doing what you do!

    3. HelenMeG,
      A lot of us here feel ashamed of our country or its establishment.
      I'm not here for Maddie as such, more for what her death has revealed to me about what's going on.
      Let her death not have been completely in vain.

    4. Thank you for that message Textusa. I'm Anon yest at 1.47.. Thank you too Helenmeg for your reply and understanding. I am annoyed with myself that I do actually feel a sense of revulsion towards certain much published photographs. Of a poor poor child for goodness sake!! However, did you see the one of her Kateness posted on twitter yesterday by Teddy (aka
      Himself) ?? I really would like to know when that one was taken!

  62. Sky News - 5 white british children assaulted in Algarve on top of the 12 already reported. The same "modus operandi" as for Maddie, says Redwood. Really? Hard to believe.
    Something really serious and shameful happen to Maddie that needs to be covered by the british authorities. Something so serious that lead SY to present to the world a very bad picture about the british parents and british tourists who travel abroad- parents are irresponsible and leave their children at the risk of being easy targets for paedos and when attacked did not report it to the police to get the perpetrators caught and jailed. What a good parenting. And what about the mens, the british tourists who travel abroad to give free time to their instincts and attack children of the same nationality, at night and inside their rooms? Too much to believe. What normally happen when a story is exagerated? Time proves, is a lie, a fabrication to cover up the real story.
    Did Redwood knows that paedophilia is a disturbance very close to a disease and who suffers of it could not control the instincts and sellect the moment or the country to act? Where have been this paedos before arriving to Algarve? In Uk? Why they did not attack in other countries, including UK? Only in Portugal. Well, Redwood want us to believe they were singular Paedos, which on Maddie case not only selected the country and the region but selected also a small town in a low season, when children were the most improbable subject to find. Amazing that none attack was reported in the hot season ( July, Aug, Sep). Why? Affraid to have many other tourists contradicting this rubbish strategy? Everything is being meticulously calculated to be played. But as usual, they fail on the details. Did Redwood knows that the OC has a School nearby, which could be a easy target for Paedos in low season, when the schools are open? Why omitting that fact? Why a Paedo should bother himself and take too much risks by controlling houses, entering them, if a school is available with many children? And how the Paedo enter 17 houses without damaging anything on the properties? They were all unlocked? Did he got the keys of all of them? See Redwood, too much questions to which you need a good excuse.
    To be noticed as well that Sky news brought back Tannerman/ creche dad. The Smiths man is a subject to avoid. Creche dad, you need very good alibis for the months the days the assaults were reported. No worries.... I strongly believe, you too is a fabrication of Redwood to credibilize the kidnap of Maddie by a stranger.

    Another topic that call my attention- just google " anglican priests + UK+ Praia da Luz + Mccann's". You arrive to a link from Pamalan where all the connections are there to be seen- the anglican priests, the Portugal Resident, who seems to be the paper that covers all the priest activities and some interesting old articles. One in the US media, where a lady claims to have his son Louie playing football with Maddie near the pool on the afternoon of May 2. Was she not reported to be in the creche that afternoon? If the football epysode happen, the girl must be tired at night and have a good sleep, then how she cried to bothered mrs Fenn and the other couple? Who is lying? Probably all, since on that case there was no innocent and honest witnesses.
    And what about the Hubbards, who seems to know well the Algarve and the British comunnity but pretended to be new on the statements given to the police? Susan said on her statement to PJ that she organized in the church( not in PDL) an event for missing children On 25 of May and invited Kate. I believe, if happen will deserve an article on the Portugal resident. Nothing was reported. There was a church activity involving several anglican priests on 19. On 25, nothing was reported and Kate also failed to report a so kindly event from her best friend in Algarve.

  63. At first I believed the Smith sighting for what it was and that it was genuine. But now I have my doubts, considering the duplicity and lies within this case for example Kate’s book attempting to rewrite facts and their relentless pursuit of Sr Amaral, their on-line store and scripted interviews and the lengths those involved will go to mislead and misinform the public I feel uneasy with their sighting. Firstly the McCann’s made an appeal to Irish tourists which at the time seemed odd, why Irish? And nothing seems to have come from this sighting, no further evidence just more controversy it’s very similar to the Gaspers statements. IMO these ‘events’ are published to confuse and mislead. At the beginning the McCann’s did not have the professional backing they have today and consequently many amateurish mistakes were made by them, for example his daily blog and their frequent jogging, Kate carrying cuddle cat everywhere but once highly paid and aware individuals became involved these ‘mistakes’ were quickly corrected. Today the only paper that bothers to carry ‘Maddie’ news is the Express; this paper was sued by the McCann’s for thousands. This case clearly has all the ingredients of a cover-up far too many coincidences and too much publicity for one child. The fact that they are still able (7 years later) to have front page headlines clearly indicates influential people are involved, I believe in the old adage ‘give someone enough rope and they will hang themselves’. The McCann’s are involved in the cover-up because innocent parents do not act in the way the McCann’s have acted. Eventually they will be found guilty, and they will fact justice for their crimes and the truth will be revealed, but in the meantime I would like to thank Textusa et al for all your work, it is read by many and unlike the fawning on-line news articles concerning the McCann’s that refused to allow comments, we can comment here, we are aware of the lies presented to us by team McCann and that is what bothers the McCann’s they cannot silence the internet.

  64. Star
    Amazing new clue/ red herring/
    Found by ex- police constable, long time departed from the police force.
    No logo relating to beer described in the original story, just a big 0, but don't let that stop anyone confabulating


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.