Friday, 27 June 2014


We hereby confirm the news that will make some happy and others unhappy Textusa team is breaking up.

For Summer. Only for Summer.

Yes, it’s that time of year again, Summer Hols.

Our regular Summer Break is very welcomed (we’re certain) by those who now can look upon Fridays for a couple of months without the unpleasant surprises these weekdays have come to represent while those who will have to wait until September to read us again will, we hope, be rather discontent.

Unlike whoever is responsible for the SY Farce – honestly, it’s so absurd that we hesitate in what to call it: SY Farce, SY Fiasco, SY Absurdity, SY Meltdown, etc... – we do not let the Lisbon Trial affect our personal agenda.

The team had planned to break for Summer during the months of July/August and that is what we will do, irrelevant of the fact the damages trial, wrongly called libel, is to have sessions on the 8 and 10 July.

About the damages v libel, it’s quite amusing to see how the Black Hats were able to, once again, instil in people exactly what they wanted.

“Libel”, like “negligence” and “paedophilia” is a catchy word that is easily picked up by a thirsty crowd whenever one wants to misinform.

We are not lawyers but it seems to us that libel in the UK has a different interpretation than in Portugal.

In the UK, Mr Amaral would have to prove he did not defame the McCanns. In Portugal, the McCanns have to prove Mr Amaral did defame them.

For the trial to be libel it would mean the McCanns would have to prove that Mr Amaral lied when he said that Maddie was dead and then seek financial compensation for the damages that lie caused.

We are sure they won’t ever risk proving publicly that what Mr Amaral has said in his book about Maddie being dead is a lie. All they can do and have done is to hiss and grunt about it but never really contest it in a court of law.

That's why we challenged, more than 5 years ago, the McCanns to sue Mr Amaral for libel in our "A New Symbol for the McCanns - A Proposal" (27May09) and "We shan't forget nor let you forget" (29May09):

The best they did was to put, in January 2010, a gagging order against Mr Amaral's book. Go to court to stop the selling of the book but not to go to there and call Mr Amaral a liar.

We provided our opinion about the McCann's venture into the Portuguese Justice system in our "Nobel Stupidity Prize of the Millenium" post (13JAN10).

Unsurprisingly, they failed to meet the challenge for a confrontation then and continue to avoid discussing facts in court.

The nearest they got to pronounce the words defamation and slander is expressed in the decision of the appeal to overturn the initial sentence of the book ban:

"30 - The first Defendant knows what defamation and slander mean."

To know what defamation and slander means doesn't in any way mean one has committed either or both.

To state that another person knows the meaning of both defamation and slander is far from accusing him of having committed either or both.

Nowhere in the dispatch is there the expression "the first Defendant defamed" or "it is claimed the first Defendant has defamed".

They never claim Mr Amaral has lied. We will repeat this as many times as we find it necessary to repeat it.

They have only left that implicit. They never say it explicitly.

They limit their implicit accusation against a background supported by the archival dispatch. According to them, it exists so Mr Amaral shouldn't be saying such things. What things? That Maddie is dead. Why, is he wrong? The process has been archived they will answer.

It's true that the dispacth that detemined the process was to be archived in 2008 doesn't accuse them of anything but it's as much true that it doesn't exempt them from anything in the case. Nowhere it says that they are guilty and nowhere does it say they're innocent.

And nowhere in that dispatch does it say she was abducted and is alive. So when Mr Amaral says Maddie is dead he's not contradicting in any way the dispatch.

It simply says there wasn't not enough evidence to proceed so best to archive it.

The fact it was archived and not closed meant the Public Ministry accepts that one day there will be enough evidence to close it one way or another, as was proved in 2013 when it was reopened.

What they claim in this trial, as far as we were able to see, is 2 things:

- that when Mr Amaral said Maddie died in that apartment that night he seriously and significantly hindered the search for her;

- and that the book has caused serious and significant distress to the entire McCann family

Only the the implication that Mr Amaral has lied but nowhere seeking to prove it.

Even if they have included in the claim the "right to a good name", which probably they have, we are certain the reasons as to why the good of the name has been affected were not. At least explicitly. Most probably it will have been something like there's this dispatch and the claimants are entitled to their good name.

They limit themselves to allege that when Mr Amaral voices his beliefs that Maddie is dead he causes such a negative effect on all those supposed to be searching for Maddie (authorities and population) that they feel demotivated to pursue.

Mr Amaral, according to the McCanns seems to have the power of influence of a religious guru of a worldwide major cult. He's off his rocker, they say, but they fear people will follow him blindly regardless. Apparently, according to them, he's able to tell people to jump and they will do it without giving it a thought.

They claim also that when Mr Amaral's voices his belief's it causes horrendous distress to them and their family. Or as the Mirror (12JUL09) writes "the couple both suffer from "permanent anxiety, insomnia, lack of appetite, irritability and an indefinable It also says Kate McCann is "in a deep and serious depression"."

This, by the way, does not stand the test of time. They've been seen at fundraising events, out running, attending functions and Clarence Mitchell also denied Kate was once suicidal. It's past its sell, by date. No wonder they wanted a negotiated settlement

They do NOT question Mr Amaral’s beliefs but the effects these beliefs have caused on the search for Maddie and on themselves. That, as far as we can see, and we're no legal experts, is nothing to do with libel

The debate in court was whether book distressed them more than being made arguidos and how could such distress be quantified.

The plaintiffs' witnesses listed above put on a really poor show for the plaintiffs.

Day 1, witness 1 - Susan Hubbard
Susan Hubbard stated that everybody in Portugal believed in the book and that only in PdL some people believe in Kate and Gerry.

Day 1, witness 2 - Emma Loach
Emma Loach said “they were more ashamed to be arguidos than because of what the book says" when she should have said exactly the opposite as the case was supposed to be that they were more upset by the book! She also said she had seen the book published and on some bookshops in the UK. And that between the book and the files the only difference is that the first is easier to read.

Day 1, witness 3 - David Edgar
David Edgar confirmed the PJ went on investigating after the case was archived.

Day 2, witness 1 - David Trickey
David Trickey is a psychologist contracted by Madeleine's parents concerning the twins. He only sees them a few weeks after Madeleine disappeared so a year before the book was published. He doesn’t even know at what age the twins went to school. 

Day 2, witness 2 - Angus McBride
Angus McBride when asked “can you mention specifics about the effect of the book in July 2008?” says he can’t.

Day 3, witness 1 - Alan Pike
Alan Pike has no qualifications to give a testimony as an expert. He’s just a crisis counsellor, who in court admits he’s not a psychologist. Said he only has some competences in psychology - it seems psychology was one of the elements in his degree.

Day 3, witness 2 - João Melchior Gomes
João Melchior Gomes said he didn't read the book nor did he watch the documentary. This led to a momentary silence enveloping the court room.

Day 3, witness 3 - Alípio Ribeiro
Alípio Ribeiro also said he didn't read the book nor did he watch the documentary.

Day 3, witness 4 - Claudia Nogueira
Claudia Nogueira asked whether whoever reads Mr Amaral’s book might think he speaks the truth, instead of seizing the opportunity of exposing him as a liar doesn’t answer and only said she’s read the book.

Day 4, witness 1 - Michael Wright
Michael Wright, who wanted to use written notes in court, when asked by judge how could the book interfere with the investigation, first remains silent and then said “it didn't”. According to him it only interfered with the following investigations made by the private investigators hired by Kate and Gerry.” The book, according to Wright demotivated only those hired by the McCanns!

Day 4, witness 2 - Isabel Stilwell
Isabel Stilwell says that everything in the media tended to make the McCann couple more distant than they were and when finally the book was published, the issue appeared to be resolved and closed, so admitting that public’s negative perception of the McCanns was due to the media, rather than to Mr Amaral’s book.

Day 6, witness 1 - Trish Cameron
Trish Cameron says when the McCanns came back to the UK, the people supported them and that after the book was published, the number of supporters decreased but then recognised she had heard of a petition containing some 17,000 signatures which originated in the UK in January 2008 - six months before the book - which demanded that Social Services investigate the family about the children being left alone.

Day 6, witness 2 - Henrique Machado
Henrique Machado spoke about an interview with Gonçalo Amaral he did together with Eduardo Dâmaso. Nothing about the book, about the book’s effect on the investigation or distress it may have caused to the McCanns.

Day 6, witness 3 - Eduardo Dâmaso 
Eduardo Dâmaso, also was called as a witness for the defendants, was,  as witness for the plaintiffs, also questioned about the same interview with Gonçalo Amaral. In this inquiry, Isabel Duarte inexplicably quotes the following passages from that interview:

“The little girl died in the apartment. Everything is in the book, which is faithful to the investigation until September: it reflects the understanding of the Portuguese and the English police and of the Public Ministry. For all of us, until then, the concealment of the cadaver, the simulation of abduction and the exposure or abandonment were proved.”

 “And the issue of the bedroom window, where Maddie and her siblings slept, is vital. It leads to simulation. The question is whether or not it was open when Jane says that she saw the man carrying the child. The little girl’s mother, Kate, is the only person that mentions the open window.”

 “Due to the type of fluid, we policemen, experts, say that the cadaver was frozen or preserved in the cold and when placed into the car boot, with the heat at that time
[of the year], part of the ice melted. On a kerb, for example, something fell from the car boot’s right side, above the wheel.”

 “It may be said that this is speculation, but it’s the only way to explain what happened there.”

Isabel Duarte ends this very damning reading to the McCanns to question Dâmaso only about Correio da Manhã’s choice of a “banner headline”!

One has to wonder if these witnesses were brought in by the plaintiffs or by the defendants. They really helped the latter.

They did not seem to be there to give evidence to prove defamation, only that the book had caused more damage to feelings than the contents of the official files. And that more distress was caused because the book made it easier for the facts to be understood!

Damage to feelings of the twins would be a prediction, not an established fact. No evidence was given as to current damage.

Note that in court debate little was discussed about the search for Maddie being hindered.

It's a fact there has been no damage to the search, which has been ongoing and likely to prove the most costly in the recent history of searches for missing children.

The debate on the part of the plaintiffs centered almost only on the distress Mr Amaral's book allegedly caused the McCanns.

It was more of an harassment trial than anything else. The McCanns seem to claim that Mr Amaral is  harassing, since 2008, them with his book and for that they want 1,2M€ in compensation.  We know the book has haunted them since then but it we're sure it would be a legal first for anyone to be condemned for haunting.

This couple seems to have suffered a greater loss from Mr Amaral saying Maddie was dead than they seem to have by losing Maddie.

From May 2007 until mid-August that year we all witnessed a couple partying on the newly found celebrity status .

From that September until archival we saw an angry but fearful couple fighting for their life, seeking desperately excuses and not their daughter.

From the archival onwards, which coincided with Mr Amaral’s book being published, we saw a vengeful couple against the former detective.

It seemed to all that to lose their daughter was bad but to have Mr Amaral say she was dead was much worse. That it seems caused them bigger pain than from imagining their daughter at the hands of possible sadist.

Mr Amaral really seemed to affect them. The disappearance of their daughter didn't seem to affect as much.

The fact that they leave on implicit terms that according to them Mr Amaral is lying is a very subtle wordplay that allows them, in our opinion, to be perceived as having a libel trial against Mr Amaral without, in reality, risking going into it.

This allows the following to be said as it was by BBC News:

"Goncalo Amaral published a book claiming the girl was dead and that her parents had lied about what happened.

The McCanns, who deny the claims, say the book discouraged people from coming forward with information.

The family's lawyer Isabel Duarte told reporters that the couple are seeking damages because they claim Mr Amaral's book defamed them and they maintain Madeleine was abducted.

They allege the book turned Portuguese public opinion against them."

In court we all saw how the accusation went on to prove in exactly what way Mr Amaral had defamed the McCanns.

This however has allowed them to have gained the status of being seen defending their honour without any risk of facing in court real issues being discussed.

Everyone is referring to it as libel trial, don't they? The Black Hats getting what the Black Hats want and the crowd going joyfully along.

They did it with negligence, and they are now doing it with libel.

They did it with paedophilia and they’re now doing it with libel.

Please call it what it is – the Damages Trial, or the Lisbon Trial. To associate the word libel with this trial is to play their game. Is to help them get their message across. They did not sue for libel, they sued for hindering and distress.

We don’t expect any surprises from the trial in July.

On the 8th, we expect to see distraught McCanns whining about how a sorry couple they are since Mr Amaral decided to voice his belief that Maddie no longer is alive.

How Mr Amaral has ruined their life with those malignant, evil words and will unsurprisingly twist the fact that SY has spent hundreds of thousands of pounds looking for a body - during which we didn’t hear the slightest whimpering protest from them - into it being the ultimate proof that their hope Maddie is still alive is rightful and reasonable.

We expect to see on the 8th a merciless couple begging for mercy. And demanding that mercy be transformed in money, please. 1,2M€ of it if you don’t mind. If SY has already blown away 8M£, 20% of that doesn’t seem that much now. does it?

On the 10th we expect to see a Mr Amaral voicing his indignation about all. Or we hope to have Mr Amaral doing that.

He has shown signs that he has rolled up his sleeves and he is ready to fight. To fight hard. To throw punches where they really hurt.

To not give any quarter to those who have wronged him.

The time for him to be nice is over and this is leaving the Black Hats terrified. Especially if he starts to speak in court about how the British ambassador in Portugal meddled in the investigation. And to speak about the protection thing. You know, the "group of friends" that are being protected?

Then there’s the sentencing. No surprises there.

It won’t be before we return from our holidays.

Although the judge has had more than enough time to have seen all evidence presented and to prepare, or at least outline, the sentence even before hearing what she’s predictably is going to hear from the final allegations from either side there are 2 things between the 10th and the reading of the sentence: the Judicial Holidays in Portugal starting in mid-July and the 30 days the McCanns have to provide an authorisation to represent Maddie.

So, best scenario will be a date set for the end of September or early October. Almost to the year after it was initially expected.

Earlier only if the McCanns state clearly that they will be denied authorisation. We don't expect that to happen, at least not before the Judicial Holidays.

About the sentence itself, no surprise expected.

If it goes Mr Amaral’s way, we hope the judge admonishes Isabel Duarte for such a poor show from the plaintiffs.

We didn’t see a single shred of evidence to prove the thesis that Mr Amaral’s words in 2008 hindered since in any way any search for Maddie. In fact, SY’s Circus in 2014 more than proves that Maddie is indeed dead, it has also proven the British state is willing to spend enormous amounts of cash to search for Maddie's body, 6 years after Mr Amaral published his book.

So, if it goes his way, no surprise.

If it goes against Mr Amaral, no surprises there either. As we have said repeatedly, it will only reveal nonsense. If that is to be the case, it will transparently reveal how much the Establishment couldn't care less about you and us and that any and all game within some hunting grounds are only for the amusement of nobility no matter how starving the populace may be.

Commoners not allowed to poach there. Stay away. You are not welcomed and trespassers will be prosecuted and sentenced.

Lest we forget, Mr Amaral's book was banned in the XXIst century in a country belonging supposedly to the western civilised world, and in which a revolution to gain free speech is celebrated with a national holiday each year since 1975.

So if that happens we won't be surprised. Just disappointed.

But if that happens do you know who really is going to be disappointed? To the point of a possible meltdown? The McCanns.

The last thing they want is for the judge to pronounce a sentence in their favour. That will mean that Mr Amaral will appeal and the nightmare will go on.

The best option for them is to drop the case because of the WoC issue. That will make their legal team look quite incompetent but we don’t think it’s possible to look worse. This issue should not have been an issue in the first place.

By "having" to drop the case they have to hear the judge give them reason and see the nightmare continue or give the reason to Mr Amaral and suffer an humiliating defeat at the hands of their biggest foe.

But maybe all in the game are waiting for this humiliating defeat. We don't think anyone, and we mean really anyone, wants the McCanns to win this thing.  

About the game, the month of June has brought us some interesting news. We would like to highlight 2: Daniel Abreu from Madeira and SY’s engagement in the Burglary Thesis and how they blew it.

Daniel's mother on TVI, via phone, playing the part in fake abduction (image from Publico)
Daniel, the little boy who was supposedly abducted and who was found alive 3 days later about 4 kms away from where he had disappeared, alone and crying but relatively clean and nourished.

This last week Daniel’s mother. Lídia, confessed it was all a hoax. She (we have yet to know if she was the mastermind of the plot) faked the abduction so Daniel could have been sold to another family.

At the time the McCann silence relative to a case very similar to theirs was noted. And this silence became as pitch high as a million thunders at once when the boy was found alive and well 3 days later.

Supposedly, similar to what everyone (except those who knew that not to be possible from the very beginning) had wished to have happened in May 2007: Maddie to have been found well and alive in time to celebrate her 4th bithday. And yet, from the McCanns we only heard sepulchral silence.

Daniel, the abducted toddler, found well and alive and the McCanns stayed clearly away from him. Why?

But what impressed more than the McCann silence about Daniel, it was the BH campaign trying to convince the world that he had not been abducted. Those who said it is obvious Maddie was abducted were the same ones saying it was obvious that Daniel had wandered off by himself.

arrow pointing Daniel was found
Manuel Teixeira showing where he found little Daniel  (image from iol)
They sided with the thesis that Daniel survived those 3 days because he drank water from plants. Fortunately he was found before these people started to venture that he had been able to hunt with a bow and arrows made with his bare hands and so obtained a protein balanced diet in the days he had been strolling around.

These people simply won’t face the truth even if encircled by it. We have seen them side with people like Joana Cipriano and Savile just to show how scrupulous they are.

But the biggest news in June for us was the unveiling of how committed to the whitewashing SY seemed to be.

The whitewashing thesis, or what we call it, the Bungled Burglary Theory, was, according to Mr Amaral, put forward to PJ by SY in 2007. It was considered then what everyone considers it now: ridiculous.

(24Horas full page)
SY even had 3 of its officers go and do a diligence on their own to the apartment in 25May07, authorised by PJ. They were seen measuring the window.

It seems that SY’s mission then was to befuddle PJ whitewashing the whole thing with a bungled burglary.

Don’t jump to the conclusion that we have surrendered ourselves to the whitewashing, because we haven’t. We continue to believe that it will not be the case. Now more than ever.

In our opinion, in 2007, SY, was instructed to do its best to distract PJ from guests, Ocean Club and T9 in that order and so came up with the ridiculous Bungled Burglary Theory.

After measuring it, it was obvious a single burglar couldn’t have passed thhrough that window hoding Maddie. Thus the multiple-burglar burglary.

The story was discarded but it seems SY kept it for future use.

As we have explained, we think the opening of the review was to go for the McCanns’ throat. To make them go up on a wagon and lead them through the crowd to the nearest gallows while the mob threw rotten fruit at them.

We have also explained why we think this wasn't done because without Maddie’s body there was no way to explain how the McCanns were able to dispose of the body without help.

And once it had to be accepted they had help then reasons to have been provided had to be given.

If the whitewashing had been SY’s initial plan, then the Bungled Burglary Theory would have been put out as soon as possible after the opening of the review. To ride the wave of Kate’s book publication, so to speak.

We would have heard immediately how SY were looking into all those phone calls made from PdL that night. 3,000 plus of them, wasn’t it?

Instead, immediately after the opening of the review in 2011, we heard silence. It was like Kate’s book had been thrown into a dark murky pond. It made a few of ripples going in and then the waters quickly went back to being still.

The couple went suddenly into silence, The Sun’s exclusive follow up of the book didn’t even start and we practically didn’t hear of the case from SY.

Only in 2013, 2 years later, with the 6-cleaner episode was the Maddie case picked up again, as we noted in the blog then.

That’s 2 years of silence.

That can only mean that whatever was planned to happen in 2011 didn’t. SY struggled for 2 years with various options. From plan B to plan Z. And yes, we think whitewashing or the Bungled Burglary Theory, was certainly one that was considered.

But if SY was really on the path to whitewashing, and only on the whitewashing as some advocate, why start to tighten the noose around Ocean Club? Why involve the resort's personnel? Everyone knows if you play with fire you’re likely to get your fingers burned and bringing in the Ocean Club is really taking things too close to the flames.

If it is whitewashing it indeed wants, why not involve only unknown and vague outsiders like the SuperBockman and leave things away from the resort? Away from the people who know what really happened?

The Ocean club staff, we're sure, know what happened and as fearful as they may be, no one wants have their name forever associated with the killing of the most notorious dead girl of the XXIst century if not of all history.

As we have said before, this game is being played by intelligent people. None can be underestimated. Even the apparently unintelligent have the intelligence to know that what is required of a pawn is not to have intelligence of its own but to be intelligent enough to only follow the orders of the intelligent who are effectively orchestrating the whole thing with intelligence.

We have also said that no one knows how the story is going to end. SY has, in our opinion, carefully followed a path where all options remain open. For example, the fact that in UK CW it withdraws the Paynes from the picture, that doesn’t mean they can’t be brought back to the relevant role we have the opinion they had that night.

Same with Crèche Dad. He doesn’t eliminate Murat from the equation. Crèche Dad existing only makes who JT saw from the road to be a perfectly innocent bystander. The body can still be transported, unseen, by someone else. Evidence does show that the body was moved via back gate, doesn’t it? It couldn’t have been Bundleman or Crèche Dad anyway as both appear from the other side of the apartment.

The BH, as we also have said, are facing one big problem: the PJ investigation.

The 2007/2008 experience was very traumatic for the Portuguese. Blame it on the arrogant, reckless and stupid British. If it were not for the slander campaign maybe they would get more collaboration now.

The trauma hit all echelons of the Portuguese judiciary system. The most common thought in all the minds of those concerned with the present case is “Oh, no, not this time”.

For example, who back in 2007 asked to see the files during the ongoing investigation won’t ask again this time round. He who asks is afraid to hear an “Oh, no, not this time” from the person he asks from so he will say to himself “Oh, no, I will not ask this time”.

In all echelons, including those Mr Amaral points his finger to. This time the Portuguese are extra careful. This time they are extra reclusive. This time they follow the justice secrecy literally. “Oh, no, not this time” is thought over and over again. And also said between those responsible for the process.

And who is going crazy with all this? The British. They want to get in somehow but the Portuguese are saying... you got it, “Oh, no, not this time”.

And in their desperation to get in the PJ Investigation, via having a liaison officer (we can just hear PJ saying “Oh, no, not another Stuart this time”) they blew away any possibility of whitewashing with this SY’s PdL Circus.

The SY all-round absolute fiasco.

Bungled Burglary Theory was already a difficult one to materialise. Not because the cadaver dog signalled the body behind the couch and in the back yard. That would be covered in Pat Brown’s tailored for SY tale: the burglar would have killed Maddie near the window, left her body there and then later came back pick it up and exit via back door. Then, we don’t think this is Pat’s tale so we’re picking it up and inventing our own now, the burglar would have laid down the body on the flowerbed to check if anyone was on the street and once assuring the way was clear, leave with it.

Disregarding time needed to develop enough quantities of cadaverine to contaminate, all fine, with one minor exception. How and why had the body ended up in the closet of the parents’ bedroom?

If it’s really difficult to believe a burglar killed a little girl without stealing anything and leaving no trace, and then coming back for the body to get rid of it when he had absolutely no need to do so (by coming back the probability of leaving traces were bigger) it’s completely impossible to come up with a reason why the burglar would have stashed Maddie’s body in the closet in this tale.

The cadaver dog cannot be right about the couch and be wrong about the closet. And wrong about the car. And wrong about Kate’s clothes. And about the cuddle cat.

But if not for the cadaver dog, what other reason can SY have to say, as it has said, they believe Maddie was dead when she left the Apartment? The forensic evidence? That would get us talking…

But the reason SY really bungled up the whitewashing with their humungous but unfruitful effort of convincing PJ to be pals is that they have physically and geographically limited this thesis to its impossibility.

The biggest problem facing the whitewashing was to find a suitable patsy. It was tried with Hewlett and it didn’t work well. As we said, it’s really almost impossible to find someone to be forever branded Maddie’s killer who is not.

With the circus SY has limited the possible patsies to 3 men who live nearby the first scrubland. Live, not lived. And to know they were 3 and to know where they lived and to know what their mobile numbers they have to know exactly who they are.

SY must now have 3 names. 3 real identities.

3 names of men who live not just on the Western side of PdL but exactly on the South-Western side of the town. And near THAT scrubland.

From now on, no one else will do.

They do have a pal on the East side by the water treatment station, but the 3, who SY knows specifically their identity, live there and only there.

It either comes up magically with the names of 3 men who live in South-West PdL, who know each other, who had previous criminal records, who had gone burglaring together previously and who are willing to be patsies or SY has no other option but to go for partial or full truth.

As we said time and time again, we are optimistic because we think good-sense and realism will prevail. It’s just good-sense to be realistic and see that only truth will bring closure to this issue.

See you in September!

And thank you, wonderful readers:

If we were a corporation, our shares would be soaring!


  1. Why doesn't Portugal just agree to station a contingent of British Police on the Algarve and let them take over?
    Can you imagine the outrage if the PJ arrived in the UK to conduct investigations over Portuguese citizens living or working in the UK?

  2. Have a great break. You will be missed but there's plenty here for all to cogitate over. A massive thanks for putting this case in its true perspective and context.

  3. bonjour Textusa et tout le monde,
    Je ne me lasse pas, même si certaines de vos tournures de phrases sont dures à traduire, de vous lire. Que de fois vous m'avez ouvert les yeux ou remonté le moral !!
    Outre vos talents d'écriture, vos qualités de recherche et déduction sont hors normes dans cette affaire !
    Bien sûr, je lis quelques autre blogs, mais permettez-moi, en même temps de vous souhaiter de bonnes et heureuses vacances, de vous décerner en mon nom, le titre de meilleur blog sur l'affaire Mac cann.
    C'est sincère et vous allez me manquer, encore
    bonnes vacances et pour le reste :"Qui vivra verra"
    Profitez de vos proches et amis, la meilleure chose dans la vie !

    1. Anonymous 27 Jun 2014 11:13:00,

      Merci tellement beaucoup, nous étions sans voix après cette énorme compliment!

  4. “Trish Cameron says she wishes to say something. She states that Kate studied the PJ files and the process and said it was very different from what is in the book.

    (SO protests and ID even more.
    The Judge overrules saying that it falls to the Court to compare the book and the investigation process and she does not need the intervention of the witness to do so)”

    The judge is very straightforward about not having discussed in court differences between book and files. If there couldn’t be a comparison made then the court was not seeking if GA was or wasn’t being truthful. The judge shows the trial is only about effects book may have caused and nothing else! It is not about whether GA was libellous or not. And ID protests against what Trish has said. She doesn't want that to be discussed in court!

  5. A super read. Thank you, Textusa ! :) agree with you and to quote you: "we think good-sense and realism will prevail"

    Enjoy the break. I'm already looking forward to September !

    Happy holidays to you and come back fit and healthy. Yes, we will miss your Friday edition.

  6. I´m at work and can not read this post right now. However, have a nice summer break and thank you for sharing your brilliant mind!

  7. Have a well earned holiday ladies, and I for one await your return eagerly. Fridays wont be the same for a while!

  8. Os deseo un feliz verano y descanso.

  9. Happy holidays. Thank you for all the wonderful reads we have enjoyed from you. Relax those minds over summer and return refreshed. We'll miss you xx

  10. PJ segue novas hipóteses sobre criança madeirense desaparecida - País - Notícias - RTP

    PJ segue novas hipóteses sobre criança madeirense desaparecida

    Bruna Melim/Carlos Barbosa/Délio Gonçalves27 Jun, 2014, 21:34 / atualizado em 27 Jun, 2014, 21:34
    A mãe da criança que desapareceu durante três dias na Madeira contou seis versões diferentes sobre a tentativa de venda do filho a um casal de emigrantes. Na confissão que precipitou a reviravolta no caso, Lídia Freitas disse à PJ que o bébé iria para a Venezuela, depois retificou e adiantou que seria para a África do Sul e, pelo caminho, chegou a avançar que o destino era Inglaterra. O Sexta às 9 sabe que, neste momento, a PJ já não acredita em nenhuma destas versões. Os inspetores da Madeira estão convictos que a mãe de Daniel encenou o rapto para ganhar dinheiro. Mas admitem que a finalidade possa não ter sido a venda, mas a criação de uma corrente de solidariedade que permitisse rechear uma conta bancária aberta semanas depois do desaparecimento.

    1. Translation of the article posted above by Anonymous 28 Jun 2014 10:21:00 about Daniel's case :


      Bruna Melim / Carlos Barbosa / Délio Gonçalves 27 June 2014, 21:34 / Updated on June 27 2014, 21:34

      The mother of the child who disappeared for three days in Madeira has told six different versions about the attempt to sell the child to a couple of emigrants. In confession that precipitated the turnaround in the case, Lidia Freitas told PJ that the baby would have gone to Venezuela, then rectified and put forward that it would be for South Africa and, on the way, even advanced that the destination was England. “Sexta às 9” [programme presented by Sandra Felgueira’s in RTP1 ] knows that, at this moment, PJ no longer believes in any of these versions. The inspectors from Madeira are convinced that Daniel's mother staged the abduction to make money. But they concede that the purpose might not have been sale, but the creation of a chain of solidarity that would allow to fill up a bank account opened weeks after the disappearance.”

      What we have to say about this:

      “In Criminology, a Copycat is a criminal who mimics the crimes, M.O.s, or victimologies of another criminal. It is theorized that criminals of this type copy the crimes of others in order to find their own "style"--or lack thereof.”

      If the Find Madeleine Fund isn’t criminal, at least it has spawned a crime.

  11. I had no idea a new hotel is planned for PDL on the site searched by the Met. Maybe the search wasn't a 'fiasco' after all but a deadly (no pun intended) serious search for evidence before the builders move in. Tick Tock, Mr and Mrs.

    1. Anonymous 28 Jun 2014 16:03:00,

      It’s not quite reasonable to state that SY would be anticipating this circus because a hotel would be built there.

      If the body was to be there and SY missed it after spending hundreds of thousands of tax-payers pounds, won’t the construction workers when revolving the ground, with the adequate machinery, and find it?

      Or the landscaping people if the body was to be buried outside the heavy-duty construction locations?

      If a hotel is to be built there, every single inch of that ground will be revolved. Literally.

      Your comment assumes some sort of seriousness to whatever SY did in PdL this month of June.

      We would make a real effort and try to find some seriousness, however little, if we were told they were looking for nuts and bolts that the spaceship that took Maddie may have dropped there even using transparency shields to land and take off.
      That’s how open minded we are about it.

      But no mind can be open enough to find the tiniest trace of seriousness when we’re told that someone could have dug a grave on that rock hard ground with their bare hands. Someone who lived nearby and knew how hard that ground was.

      To think any panicking burglar would choose rock hard ground on the doorstep is beyond the minimal reasonable mind.

      The spaceship hypothesis is much more realistic.

    2. Agree with all of that, but 'evidence' need not be the discovery of a body. It could be something as simple as a discarded item which would be relevant to the police investigation but absolutely meaningless to builders and landscapers.

    3. Ah yes, picture the scene: DCI Redwood's office somewhere in London. A call from detective constable Smithers on the ground in PDL.

      Smithers: Good morning Mr Redwood Sir.

      Redwood: Oh, Smithers (cups head in hand) What now?

      Smithers: Thought you'd better know, sir. The site in PDL where that muppet McCann was spotted carrying a child. They're about to build a bloody big hotel there. Could destroy any potential evidence, that could sir.

      Redwood: Oh bloody hell. We'd better arrange a search of the site pronto.

      Smithers: Under what pretence, sir?

      Redwood: We could say we think a burglar may have stolen Maddie and dumped her body in a ditch.

      Smithers: But nobody would believe that, sir. We'll be a laughing stock.

      Redwood: Don't know if you've noticed Smithers - WE'VE BEEN A LAUGHING STOCK FOR 3 BLOODY YEARS. Now if you've got any better ideas.

      Smithers: No sir. Burglar/murderer it is. But will the press run with it, sir?

      Redwood: Those cretins will run with anything with McCann on the lid. They gobbled up that crimewatch claptrap didn't they? But we'll need to make this look authentic so we'll need to get some sniffer dogs.

      Smithers: good idea, sir. I'll contact that blonde Welsh bird who was on TV a while back, she looks ho , I mean her dogs look hot, I mean efficient.

      Redwood: Good man Smithers. And we mustn't forget to be nice and keep Mr and Mrs informed, eh? (sound of sniggering)

      Smithers: Oh sir, you are a one, tee hee.

      Redwood: Now let's get this sorted. Keep up the good work. Oh by the way, Smithers. How long have you been out in that paradise of sun and sangria.? Wouldn't like you to think we've forgotten you. . . Smithers? . .Hello? Damn. Line's gone dead.

      DCI Redwood replaces the telephone and lifts from his draw a bottle of whiskey and a glass.He fills the glass, sits back in his chair of red plush and stares across the room at a picture pinned to a notice board: Mr and Mrs McCann. A maniacal grin contorts his face. The only sound - the ticking of a clock.

    4. Anonymous 28 Jun 2014 16:03:00
      Anonymous 29 Jun 2014 12:00:00
      Anonymous 29 Jun 2014 18:41:00

      Before we provide our opinion about your 3 comments, could you please tell us and our readers what you think SY was doing on the East side of PdL, on the Thursday of the second week?

      We have undestood what you seem to think they were doing on scrubland South-West of PdL. The one they spent a few days on.

      We're curious about what you think they were doing on the other side of town.

      Waiting for your reply. Thank you.

    5. I don't know.

    6. Anonymous 29 Jun 2014 21:36:00,

      Thank you for your reply.

      If we understood you well, and if we haven’t please feel free to correct us, from your 3 comments we can deduce the following:

      1. SY was in scrubland 1, or SW, to find incriminating evidence against the McCanns specifically;

      2. The McCanns, one or both, were seen in, or in the whereabouts, of scrubland 1/SW:

      3. The incriminating evidence would have been “a discarded item” by one or both McCanns;

      4. Knowing of the possibility of a hotel being built there, SY, in anticipation of construction works, decided to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds to look for a “discarded” item/items that was/were left, dropped or thrown away more than 7 years ago;

      5. To search for and find said “discarded” item/items SY thought necessary the use of a military helicopter, ground sonars, drones and dogs;

      6. SY thought possible that said “discarded” item/items was/were left, dropped or thrown away into the sewer system nearby scrubland 1/SW as they brought cameras to be used specifically with that purpose was photographed and widely publicised;

      7. SY, knowing they were looking ONLY for “discarded” item/items, engaged on public media campaign saying they were looking for Maddie's body to fool whoever may have left, dropped or thrown away “discarded” item/items more than 7 years ago to not go there and fetch them (having hovered those grounds a month before with a military helicopter).


      1. The fact that no one saw either of the McCanns anywhere near scrubland 1/SW, as we don’t consider the crossing between Rua da Escola Primária with Rua 25 de Abril to be near enough to indicate that area in particular;

      2. The fact that SY was inactive for 4 days (Saturday to Wednesday) and then deployed for no plausible reason to the other side of town for less than a single day.

      Could you please give examples of what could be, in your opinion, the possible “discarded” item/items SY was looking for?

      Waiting for your reply. Thank you.

    7. Not being a part of the police investigation, I haven't the foggiest idea. Neither do you.

      Do you really believe that the ridiculously crass police explanations as to what's going on in the investigation are the truth and nothing but the truth? They're police officers. They keep their cards close to the proverbial chest. It's what they do.
      Recall McCann's assertion back in 2007 that he'd been assured by the police that they (the McCs) were not suspects- just before being named aruidos? Police, eh? Who'd trust 'em?

      The 2 sites the Met scoured have 1 thing in common as far as I know - McCann.
      1. An area where a man matching the description of McCann was seen.
      2. An area where McCann's phone 'pinged'.

      It has been reported that the Met intend to return to Portugal within weeks and arrests are to follow. We've heard it before, of course, and I wait with bated breath. But whatever move they make next will be very interesting IMO. Partly due to the reasons you've outlined: helicopters, dogs etc I cannot believe this is just a show for the public. Also if thatwer the case, The Portuguse police and country must surely be up the Swanny both morally and intellectually. I don't believe that for a minute.

    8. You were the one that ventured "discarded item", not us.

      Please clarify where in files was a man matching the description of McCann was seen near the area of scrubland 1/SW. In UK Crimewatch, the reporter states clearly that the Smiths see the man heading towards church. According to images in PJ Files all indicates man going down the stairs, towards South.

      Please clarify where in the PJ Files ( is it specified a phone ping came from the area near the water treatment station and/or terrain on opposite side of road. As far as we can read, only general areas are given.

      Thank you

    9. Both areas are close (or 'general') enough to to warrant further investigation in such a serious case.(at least one site had already been thoroughly searched back in in 2007 by the highly regarded PJ and GNR - so they must have thought the area to be relevant).

      You don't know what the latest investigation has uncovered and neither do I. I do know however that a 'general' area involving a serious police inquiry will most certainly cover the areas of the Met digs.

      Please don't turn this into a world cupesque England Vs Portugal fiasco. Whenever the truth of what happened to Madeleine is revealed there will, I'd wager, be big surprises for pros, cons and theorists alike.

      Let's remember also that this investigation was interupted and seriously hampered by government meddlers. It is back on track. Let me ak one question Text: do you really believe the PJ and the Met are at loggerheads?

  12. Have a great break Tex - will miss you but looking forward to September....

  13. Suas "Marotas", então vão a "banhos",hehe!Presumo que a folga dos artigos de 6ª feira será um balãozinho de oxigénio, mas seguramente que a ANSIEDADE perante o quadro que se avizinha terá consequências grandes,grandes nas relações com MORPHEU .
    Fiquem Bem!


  14. EXCLUSIVE: MI5 spies know what happened to Maddie McCann, claims Portuguese detective

    MI5 AGENTS know what happened to missing Madeleine McCann but are covering it up, claims former Portuguese detective Goncalo Amaral.

    By: James Murray
    Published: Sun, June 29, 2014


    EXCLUSIVE: MI5 spies know what happened to Maddie McCann, claims Portuguese detective

    MI5 AGENTS know what happened to missing Madeleine McCann but are covering it up, claims former Portuguese detective Goncalo Amaral.

    By: James Murray
    Published: Sun, June 29, 2014

    The disgraced detective made the bombshell claim in a Portuguese television documentary that openly mocked Scotland Yard’s new investigation. When asked if people will ever learn what really happened, Mr Amaral responded: “Yes, we will, when MI5 opens the case files, we will find out.

    “Don’t forget that the British secret services followed the case right from the beginning. I don’t know if that information will be made available but if it’s like the United States, it takes years to have access to confidential information.”

    Mr Amaral, 56, was the officer who co-ordinated the Portuguese police investigation from May 3, 2007, when three-year-old Madeleine vanished from her family’s holiday apartment at Praia da Luz on the Algarve.

    After criticising British police he was kicked off the case four months later.

    In his latest interview he claims that after two British police dogs were used to searched the McCann’s apartment at the Ocean Club, his team had to take the British person responsible for the operation to Faro Airport.

    Amaral, now retired and working as a crime writer, went on: “He’s at the airport waiting for a plane to return to England and he receives a phone call. Then he explains to our colleague that a member of MI5 was at the airport, waiting to talk with him about the result of the investigation.

    “Someone has the information, so make the information available.”

    There has been suspicion in the senior ranks of Portugal’s police that US and/or British intelligence chiefs have satellite images of the area that could be helpful but have never passed them on.

    The latest Scotland Yard squad is apparently working on the theory that Madeleine was abducted by burglars who were also involved in drug trafficking. Mr Amaral said the same theory was put forward by a Yard detective seconded to his team seven years ago.

    “It was discussed and completely set aside because it made no sense,” he said. “Nobody has proved the house was broken into, that there was a theft, there are no traces of a break-in. No money, cameras or anything else was taken.”

    He said he expects the latest Yard inquiry to wind down soon, without a breakthrough, adding: “They are getting to the point of saying that she is dead.

    “They will reach the point of saying that the cadaver can’t be found and the case can’t be solved.”

    Mr Amaral will face Madeleine’s parents Kate and Gerry McCann, from Rothley, Leicestershire, at a civil court in Lisbon on July 8.

    The couple, who cling to the hope their daughter might be alive, are suing him for £1million for libel over his claim that Madeleine died in the apartment, made in his book The Truth Of The Lie.

    1. I think James Murray based his article on your Bombshelling post!!
      There GA interview tefers to SY spicing up their burglars theory by referring to drugs.
      I think Murray has extended that to saying they were traffickers.
      Having re-read the post, it's clear where the article derives from
      But he avoids naming De Freitas

    2. Anonymous 29 Jun 2014 11:49:00

      Maybe we should ask for royalties!

  16. Hello Textusa

    Great post & also great job just before your break.
    Committed as you are with the search for Truth you left no stone unturned concerning near events to come.
    Thank you so much for such hard work towards Justice and the truth of the facts.
    Belonging to the group of the discontented ones :( I have no choice but wish all of you a great break :)
    Two months ... it´s a long, very long break ;)
    Take care of yourselves.

    1. Textusa,I also wish you all a good restful break!!!! Lets hope we will be less "frustrated" with the deplorable msm reporting,and SY approach to "solving" this debacle,by September!!!! Whoops those pigs just flew by,again.

  17. Thank you so much Textusa.
    A fascinating read as always.
    Friday nights will not be the sane without you!
    Have a great break.


    Scotland Yard to quiz four formal Madeleine suspects
    6:54pm, Mon 30 Jun 2014 Last updated Mon 30 Jun 2014

    Scotland Yard is to begin questioning four formal suspects in the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, ITV News understands.

    Officers will begin questioning the four people - identified as arguidos, meaning formal suspects - tomorrow at a police station in Faro, Portugal.

    Eight key witnesses will also be questioned.

    The four-year-old vanished while holidaying with her parents in Praia da Luz in 2007.

    1. Let's for a moment disregard that SY doesn't question anyone in Portugal. If it wants to question it has to submit a LoR.

      During the first week of the SY circus, we were told that the Met wanted to question 8 suspects. We gave our opinion as to why SY wanted to do this in our "SY Contradicting SY" post

      These people referred may well have been requested to be questioned via LoR.

      However, there are a few things that do not fit. "Arguido" is status specific to Portuguese law. So, it's not up to SY to determine if someone is to be attributed such legal status.

      Either the process in which these people will be questioned is running terms in Portugal (and then only PJ is able to determine if a person is arguido or not - and it's none of SY's business) or it's in Britain (PJ limits itself to question person as per request of Brit authorities - and it's none of PJ's business what is the legal status, in Britain, under which the person will be heard).

      If, for example, there is a specification required to fulfill all the rights the person heard has to have, these should be discriminated in the LoR so the other police force questions under the absolute right circumstances.

      SY cannot ask to question someone they may think PJ may later think they will be arguidos.

      This said, this piece of news seems to innacurate.

      Also, if due to the importance of the case, seems quite unlikely to be ITV to break this. This would be news for Sky News/BBC/Lusa to break.

      We will wait and see. It would, however, be nice to know, finally, the name of these 8 people. Especially the 3 burglars. Now 4?

    2. It seems Sky News is now reporting it:

      As said, we will wait and see.


      Madeleine McCann Police To Interview Suspects

      British police investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have returned to Portugal to question a number of suspects.

      They will be speaking to a key witness, as well as several individuals suspected of carrying out burglaries, as part of the second phase of the Scotland Yard probe on the ground in The Algarve.

      The same team of British police who were involved in the digging of several sites outside the resort of Praia da Luz earlier in June arrived back in Portugal on Monday.

      Sky's Crime Correspondent Martin Brunt said: "Tomorrow, they will be joining their Portuguese colleagues and sitting in on a series of interviews with, I'm told, first a key witness, and then a number of people who are being described as aguidos (suspects).

      "We think that this includes the three or more former workers from the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz where Madeleine vanished who are suspected of carrying out a series of burglaries in the months leading up to Madeleine's disappearance.

      "Scotland Yard have made it clear for a while, if not publicly, that they are interested in talking to these suspects.

      "Now it may be just a question of eliminating them, but they have certainly been flagged up during the Scotland Yard review of the original police investigation by the Portuguese, people of interest who need to be interviewed, who may become, in a sense, more official suspects, but certainly people that Scotland Yard believe could have vital information about Madeleine's disappearance."

      Madeleine vanished from a holiday apartment in the resort of Praia da Luz in May 2007 while her parents Gerry and Kate dined with friends nearby.

      More follows...

    4. I wonder if they are UK subjects?
      Just before July 8th

    5. In our Devil's Finger post (11Jun11)

      We said: be careful OC , the finger is pointing at you.


      See reference to Malinka

    7. BBC News
      Just now confirmed all had Portuguese passports and 1 or more Russian born.
      Questioning will be 2 or more days.
      Possibly 8 suspects.
      Some will be made arguidos.
      SY will sit in on interviews.
      Suspects said to have been identified by SY.


      Malinka is arguido

    9. Malinka arguido? Now isn't that so interesting? So very interesting...

      Malinka, a nobody.

  19. Very strange silence. The first suspects about to be made arguidos should have been greeted with a fanfare of publicity and the Mcs declaring how pleased they were that SY had made so much progress.

    1. Press say suspects are SY not PJ suspects.

  20. Textusa - I know your off on your holidays and have a lovely time but before you go could you just provide your opinion on todays proposed interviews by the PJ. Is this still just part of the SY fiasco, an attempt to get into the PJ investigation or are they moving further in identifying more members of the group who took part in the events of May 4th

    1. Anonymous 1 Jul 2014 12:48:00,

      A question: when chess is being played does one mourn for a pawn that has been taken off the board? No, no one does. One concentrates on why player took said pawn and how the other player reacts.

      Pawns, very valuable pieces, have the purpose to protect bigger pieces from harm and these are only sacrificed when it is worthwhile.

      Euclides Monteiro and Sergey Malinka are only pawns. So are all those being heard in this dilligence.

      We would rate in increasing degree of importance the following in this episode:

      1. What they will say. What is once said, cannot be unsaid. And the exercise the right of silence on the part of an arguido always speaks loads.

      2. What questions has SY requested for them to answer because they reveal what SY suspects about these suspects.

      3. Who they are. Only then can links be made and can one determine the colour of each pawn.

      One should not draw too much attention to a pawn when revealed. One must try and understand the reasons of the move that has called our attention upon him.

      SY is not doing anything we haven’t said in our “SY Contradicts SY” post it was doing: damage control of a “truth” they have lost control of.

      SY telling PJ they’re willing to “accept” the unveiling of the plot up to whatever this dozen of people represent. In exchange PJ is not to look any deeper.

      This diligence presents no reason for us to change our opinion.

      There are good news and some good news.

      The good news is that SY are dramatically narrowing down their options.

      And the good news is that it’s irrelevant for PJ what SY “accepts” or not.

      As we have said before, the key to this case lies not in the PJ but in decisions made or to be made by the Portuguese Public Ministry.

  21. According to CMTV just now
    Sergey Malinka is arguido
    The three other arguidos are Portuguese.
    Eight other witnesses, totalling 12 people.
    The first one, a Portuguese, has already been questioned. SY had around 250 questions which he refused to answer, asking for a lawyer to be present. The dilligence with this arguido has been postponed until and attorney is appointed.

    1. They expect this man to answer 250 of their questions while knowing Kay Tealey refused to answer 48 of the PJ's.

      The mind boggles.

  22. To be an arguido, a person must know what is being suspected of. There has to be a formal charge or generic notion of what a person has done wrong. To use a phone is no crime. So when they were made arguidos the PJ must have told them what possible charges they were facing, right? What can PJ charge on behalf of SY?

    1. Anonymous 1 Jul 2014 16:09:00,

      We have no legal background so whatever we say on the issues requires confirmation and/or correction.

      From what we have understood about the arguido status is that it has the purpose of assuring rights.

      Namely, the right to know the accusation, the right to not tell the truth(or better, the possibility to do so without committing perjury), the right to not answer and the right to have a lawyer present in all diligences pertaining the arguido (this means the lawyer can sit and hear the questions and answers with all other witnesses and arguidos).

      The right to know the accusation in this instance is complex. In Portugal, the accusation is mandatory to have 2 aspects: the matter of fact and the matter of law. The matter of fact lists the occurrence and the matter of law quotes exactly where the facts have breached the law.

      SY has determined who the suspects and witnesses were, it’s up to them to say what the people are accused of. PJ’s role is to ensure that all goes within Portuguese legality.

      Let us paint you a perfectly and intentionally exaggerated and absurd picture to help us prove our point. Imagine, for a minute, that in the UK it was legal for the police to torture a suspect to obtain a confession. The suspect is in Portugal which such method of interrogation. So UK would ask PJ to beat the hell out of the suspect to see if he wears shoes size 9. As the legality demands that in Portugal the suspect can only be verbally questioned, it would simply ask the suspect if he wore size 9 shoes, wait for whatever answer and retransmit that back to SY.

      This to say that the process involving these suspects/witnesses is running its terms in the UK, so the charges have to originate there. The methodology in which they are questioned is the Portuguese one as they are in Portugal.

      It's like when 2 Worlds Collide - 2 entirely different systems.


    Maddie: "Estes não são os suspeitos da PJ"

    Os interrogatórios feitos na PJ de Faro são conduzidos por inspetores portugueses. Mas a investigação é inglesa.

    Hugo Franco | 13:20 Terça feira, 1 de julho de 2014

    Quinze dias depois do desaparecimento de Madeleine McCann, em maio de 2007, Sergei Malinka saía de madrugada das instalações da Polícia Judiciária (PJ) de Portimão. O cidadão russo tinha sido interrogado durante várias horas pelos investigadores, que haviam levado dois computadores e outro material do seu apartamento no terceiro andar de um prédio situado perto do aldeamento Ocean Club, na Praia da Luz, em Lagos.

    Apesar de na altura ter sido um dos principais suspeitos no caso - a par com outro cidadão estrangeiro, Robert Murat - o russo não foi constituído arguido, ao contrário de Murat. E desde então nunca houve provas ou indícios mais fortes que o incriminassem.

    A Scotland Yard não tem a mesma opinião da PJ, e interrogou o russo durante o dia de hoje, nas instalações da PJ em Faro. Sergei Malinka é um dos quatro principais suspeitos da polícia britânica, que deverão ser ser constituídos arguidos nas próximas horas. Dois deles estavam a ser ouvidos esta manhã. As inquirições vão-se prolongar durante esta semana.

    Será a polícia portuguesa a conduzir os interrogatórios, mas na Judiciária existe uma convicção clara, resumida numa frase por uma fonte próxima do processo: "Estes são os suspeitos da Scotland Yard e não da PJ, que se limita a cumprir o que lhe é solicitado." Outro investigador da Judiciária diz não compreender a lógica dos colegas britânicos. "Até agora, não trouxeram nada de novo."

    Além dos quatro potenciais arguidos, a equipa inglesa tem uma lista de onze testemunhas que também quer ouvir muito em breve. Independentemente sobre quem está, ou não, na mira da Scotland Yard, um facto parece ser certo: "A investigação portuguesa não aponta nesta direção", revela um responsável da PJ ao Expresso.

    Ou seja, na ótica da PJ, existe um risco elevado de os homens que viajaram de Londres para Faro, instigados pelo primeiro ministro David Cameron (que já gastou mais de 5 milhões de euros no orçamento para esta investigação), regressarem a casa com uma mão cheia de nada. As escavações realizadas há poucas semanas perto da Igreja da aldeia da Luz saldaram-se por um fracasso. Não foi encontrado qualquer indício que apontasse na direção da criança que tinha três anos quando desapareceu da Praia da Luz.

    Imprensa britânica pressiona

    Alguns jornais ingleses continuam a pressionar a Scotland Yard para obter resultados. Outros, limitam-se a ouvir as fontes oficiais da polícia. O que é certo é que em Londres existe a convicção que algum dia, Madeleine McCann será encontrada, viva ou morta.

    O "Daily Mail", o "The Guardian" e a BBC são alguns dos órgãos de comunicação social que mais de perto seguem a investigação. "Os suspeitos foram todos identificados pela Scotland Yard. O interrogatório será conduzido pelos detetives da PJ. Todos os suspeitos foram notificados e serão interrogados esta terça-feira e nos próximos dias", resume o "The Guardian".

  24. Latest news suggests dogs may be used to check cars.
    Would same cars be around after 7 years?

    1. Not Malinka's car from 2007...that one was set on fire while parked on a street...


    Madeleine McCann suspects grilled by British cops

    THE first pictures of the Madeleine McCann suspects emerged yesterday.

    By Marc Walker & Jerry Lawton/Published 2nd July 2014

    The four latest men to be named “persons of interest” by the Portuguese police were asked more than 250 questions about the youngster’s disappearance.

    The “arguidos” – official suspects, were ferried in the back of cars to a police station in Faro, on the Algarve, where Scotland Yard detectives are sitting in on the interviews.

    A man standing outside the police station claimed to be the “surrogate father” of one of the men and said his schizophrenic “son” faced a total of 253 questions from Brit officers.

    The man claimed it was “inhuman” to quiz him as he was “a sick man”.

    He said the 51-year-old was only pulled in because he bore a resemblance to a British police E-fit.

    Officers were given 96 hours to speak to the men, with the interviews expected to finish on Friday.

    The Yard is working on the theory burglars killed Maddie in a bungled break-in at the Praia da Luz apartment in May 2007 while parents Kate, 46, and Gerry, 45, ate tapas in a nearby bar with friends.

    But Portuguese detectives believe Madeleine, then aged three, was snatched by a foreigner who is no longer in the country.

    Yesterday Gerry told locals in his home village of Rothley, Leics: “The Met Police are chipping away and there is new evidence.

    “We are going to continue hoping we get a happy outcome. ’’

    A further eight people, thought to be mainly ex-workers from the resort, are also due to be quizzed as witnesses.

    Two of the suspects rushed in for questioning yesterday were seen to duck down in the back of the vehicles.

    All four are Portuguese but one is thought to be a businessman with connections to Russia.

    1. An answer, resolution, be reunited with M, anything but happy!
      But he means they hope to be exonerated. That would make them very happy..


    Ingleses pedem ADN de arguidos a todo o custo no caso Maddie
    Publicado às 00.28

    A Polícia britânica chegou a pedir à Polícia Judiciária para proceder à recolha de impressões digitais e o perfil de ADN dos quatro suspeitos agora constituídos arguidos. Nem que fosse à socapa.

    O pedido consta de uma carta rogatória de julho do ano passado, mas foi contestada pela PJ, por se tratar de uma ilegalidade. A pedido da Scotland Yard e com o aval do Ministério Público, os suspeitos foram formalmente constituídos arguidos, terça-feira, por inspetores da Diretoria do Sul da PJ, em Faro.

  27. So they brought the dogs. What makes these more reliable than the 2007 ones?
    And what is there to stop anyone from saying it wasn't from diapers and fish? I'm sure that 2007 Praia da Luz the strangest of all villages in the world was full of cars with diapers and rotting fish in their trunks.


  29. From JM

    The British Police even asked the Judiciary Police to start collecting fingerprints and DNA profiles of the four suspects now constituted as arguidos. Even if it was done in a sneaky way.

    The request appears in a letter rogatory dated of July last year, but was challenged by the PJ, since it is an illegality. At the request of Scotland Yard, and with the endorsement of the Portuguese Public Ministry, the suspects were formally constituted arguidos, Tuesday, by the PJ inspectors of the Southern Directorate in Faro.

    in Jornal de Notícias - paper edition to follow/going to buy it

    1. Thank you mc n

      This begs the obvious question: compare collected DNA with what DNA?

      To ask for DNA to have been collected in the manner suggested shows complete ignorance of Portuguese law, which means not even the most basic homework was done.

      The British were present when DNA was collected in 2007 so they know what the correct procedures are.

      SY are playing detectives. The same way they did when they said they used satellite images for the searches.

      Putting on a show to pressure PJ.

  30. In today's Correio da Manhã:

    "Chamadas e cabelos tramam 4 suspeitos Sergey Malinka arguido porque tinha sofá com cabelo cujo ADN "se assemelha" ao de Maddie."

    So, phone calls and hair frame suspects?!
    Malinka had hairs on his sofa that could match Maddie's hair!!!
    You've got to be kidding me!!! When was that hair collected? Now?! Or back in 2007? If it was in 2007 why wasn't it acted upon then? And, if it was collected now, can anyone believe that? The sofa was not cleaned, or at least vacuumed since 2007??? Wow, that's some sticky hair!
    And by the way SY, if you're bringing up hairs...what about the hair found in the Scenic's trunk? The ones the FSS said could not be analyzed for lack of roots...? There are labs worldwide capable of testing rootless hairs for DNA, you know? And, the McCanns and friends made many calls and text messages on their mobile fact, they were provided with "new" sets of phones after the 3rd May, weren't they?
    When will we see headlines saying "phone calls and hairs in car frame the McCanns!"???


    The other 3 arguidos are named:
    José Carlos Silva, OC driver
    Pedro Ribeiro, drug-addict with mental problems
    Ricardo Rodrigues, friend of Pedro Ribeiro.


    The questioning in Faro’s PJ requested by SY within the scope of the investigation of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance continues.

    After the 4 arguidos, today the 8 witnesses requested by the British Police

    Hairs found on the couch of Sergey Malinka had DNA very similar with Madeleine McCann’s. This is the main evidence that Scotland Yard presented to the Public Ministry to constitute as arguido the man born in Russia but living for many years in Praia da Luz in the Algarve.

    With him, there are 3 other men, now also arguidos at the request of the English police:

    José Carlos Silva, driver of Ocean Club in March (Sic, May) 2007 when Maddie disappeared from the resort,

    Pedro Ribeiro, who the English classify as drug-addict and schizophrenic,

    Ricardo Rodrigues, a young man who at the time was close to Pedro Ribeiro.

    These three men made a series of phone calls considered suspicious on the night of March (sic, May) 3 2007 when Maddie disappeared.

    SY believes the three planned the burglary and when faced with the little girl killed her and took her body.

    All the arguidos were heard on Monday in the Faro’s PJ. This Tuesday the questioning continues, now with the 8 witnesses that SY requested they were heard.

    The English also brought along to the Algarve the tracking dogs specialised in detecting corpses. The intention is that the animals inspect the cars the 4 arguidos had in 2007.

    The diligences are to extend, at least, until Friday.

    in CMTV [Correio da Manhã TV], July 2, 2014

    1. To our readers.

      What is described here is far too serious for a simple comment.

      We are working, the best we can under circumstances, to write a post about this.

      Thank you

    2. Oh Textusa I knew you wouldn't leave us in the lurch

    3. When the DNA was found in the hired car and it was 14 out of 19 markers to MBM. You could say that this means that it was similar to MBM. What if the hair found on the couch of Sergey Malinka was an exact match to that hair i.e. there was a link between the hair found in the hire car and the hair found on the couch


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.