Friday, 7 November 2014

The £10,000,000 Man

The game continues. This week we had 5 articles that we wish to call your attention to:

- On Tuesday 04NOV2014, Jornal de Noticias, by Marisa Rodrigues, “Maddie Case: 10 witnesses to be questioned within the scope of the English investigation”.

- On Tuesday 04NOV2014, the Express, by Levi Winchester & Gerard Couzens, “Maddie McCann: British police to return to Portugal for fresh interviews”.

- On Wednesday 05NOV2014, Correio da Manhã, by Rui Pando Gomes, “More questionings with new arguidos”.

- On Wednesday 05NOV2014, the Mirror, by Tom Pettifor & Gerard Couzens, “Madeleine McCann: Scotland Yard cuts number of detectives working on the case ”.

- On Thursday 06NOV2014, Jornal de Notícias, by Marisa Rodrigues, “DNA clears crucial suspect in the Maddie case”.

If the information contained in the press reports are accurate, we now know SY’s 5th rogatory request has been authorised.

It seems SY has opted out of asking permission to re-interview the 3 previous suspects, or the “July arguidos”, as is reported in the 04NOV Jornal de Noticias article: “Even though the English police has expressed their interest in questioning again the four men constituted as arguidos, that had been questioned back in July, the English ended up leaving them out of this rogatory letter”

This is confirmed in the 04NOV Express article: “It was thought three of the suspects would be given a new grilling when the Operation Grange team led by DCI Andy Redwood returned to Portugal.”

It is understood that Mrs Sequeira only authorised interviews with witnesses whom British police have never questioned directly. So, apparently, in their 5th rogatory letter, SY opted out of asking for permission to reinterview the suspects.

The 05NOV Correio da Manhã article says nothing about the “July arguidos” although they’re implicitly mentioned when it’s said about these new hearings that “all will be formally heard for the first time after the green light by the MP magistrate”.

We do find it strange how SY knew, in August, the opinion of a prosecutor who had just landed in her new job in the middle of a chaotic situation caused by the implementation of the new Portuguese Judicial Map and the yet to be clarified glitch in the supporting software CITIUS that simply paralysed the whole system nationwide.

Apparently, in AUG2014, during the Portuguese judicial holidays, SY anticipated that Inês Sequeira wouldn't allow hearing any of the “July arguidos”. 

However, in our opinion, the fact that it took Mrs Sequeira 2 months and a “pressuring visit” to Faro from SY to dispatch what apparently had been coordinated with her, appears to indicate that she is not exactly playing ball the way the British would like her to be playing it.

Then we have the 06NOV Jornal de Notícias article saying: “Euclides’ DNA also wasn’t found in the apartment in Praia da Luz where the child disappeared from, seven years ago.”


Then that means ALL the 444 hair-strand vestiges found have been clearly identified as to whom they belong to and none of them belongs to Euclides.

And isn’t it a little too early to exclude for certain Euclides’ DNA from apartment? Isn’t there, supposedly, going to be re-testing done of the vestiges found that is supposed to be requested by SY via a 6th rogatory letter yet to be sent to Portugal? Are they already sure they won't find any of Euclides' DNA in the new results? From what we read, it appears that is the case.

And, even if it were true, that no DNA no Euclides will be found, why does that exclude him? Is there any reason for one to be excluded from a crime just because one’s DNA doesn’t show up at the crime scene?

If one’s DNA is found at a crime scene, then that puts one there (which doesn’t in any way mean one is guilty of anything because there may be plausible reasons for it to be there) but the absence of one’s DNA certainly doesn’t exclude one from it.

For example, we think Euclides was never in Apartment 5A - making it VERY unlikely for his DNA to be found there - but it's our opinion that he is a person of interest to the case.

Another reason also for him not to be linked to Maddie is because, according to 06NOV Jornal de Notícias, it wasn’t Euclides' semen that was allegedly found in one of the alleged sex-assaults - that no one has heard of and that no one remembered to speak about when Maddie disappeared - against British little girls on holiday in the Algarve between 2004 and 2006.

Again, and supposing these fictitious sex-assaults were even real, in what way does the fact Euclides didn't participate in them exclude him from being involved in Maddie’s disappearance?

Where is the link between Maddie’s burglary and the sex-assaults? Wasn’t the assaulter a pot-bellied white man wearing a long-sleeve burgundy shirt with a white circle logo? Euclides was a tall, black man.

And finally, wasn’t it Sandra Felgueiras who back in June said clearly that Euclides was no longer a suspect of the PJ? That PJ was looking for a foreigner who had left the country?

Is Euclides being exempted after having been exempted? Does he require to be exempted every 5 months?

Could there be another reason for Euclides to have popped up again? We think there is.

The 06NOV Jornal de Notícias article opens with this phrase “The investigation line that had Euclides Monteiro as a suspect, which led to the reopening of the “Madeleine McCann case” has fallen down”. According to this, Euclides was the reason for the reopening of the process in Portugal.

In Portugal, all legal processes have timelines. Times in which they have to be concluded. There may be, for many valid reasons, the need to ask for a prorogation.

We think that a criminal investigation has one year to be completed and now is coming the time for a prorogation to be asked about this process, that was reopened in NOV2013.

If Euclides was the reason, and if Euclides has been cleared, then, apparently, there’s absolutely no reason to keep process open in Portugal.

No justification to ask for a prorogation of its deadline. The reason, Euclides, for it to have been reopened has been cleared, so logic and legal proceedings dictate that process should be again re-archived in Portugal

So, maybe, is it possible that again bringing Euclides into the picture is Portugal pressuring UK into making a move? Portugal saying to UK listen, as you can see, we have no reason to keep this open, do you? Oh, you do? Care to show us? And could you do that quickly because we need to ASK to keep this open, you know…

About the 05NOV Mirror article, about SY cutting number of detectives in Operation Grange, remember when we explained the main reason for SY to do the PdL Humiliating Week was to set foot in “enemy” territory and use the proximity to infiltrate the PJ investigation?

The 05NOV Mirror article now seems to give us reason: “The force has withdrawn six officers from the Algarve” and “the force has removed six officers despite enquiries in Portugal intensifying - with the team making an average of over a flight a week to the Algarve so far this year.”

A team of six, over once a week, doorstepping the PJ? It should call for a restraining order, we would say.

It does beg the question, why did Redwood feel the need come to Faro? Didn’t these 6 officers adequately report on everything that was to be known, updated to the day?

Then, the 05NOV Mirror article tells us that its own suggestion that the “British police have begun scaling back the search” is not quite accurate as “two detective sergeants and four detective constables” go out but “at the same time six civilian staff have been brought in”.

Six out and six in. Simple math. Cutting back only if on weekly plane trips.

Could these six new civilians be forensic related? A reaction from UK showing commitment and withdrawing its claws to a Portugal not appearing to be playing along?

The 6th rogatory letter has not yet been sent to Portugal. As Andy Redwood is reportedly retiring in a few weeks, we assume his replacement, whoever that may be, will assume responsibility for pursuing the 6th rogatory request.

The authorisation of the diligences contained in the 5th rogatory letter means that 10 (or so) new witnesses will be interviewed, some of whom were interviewed during the original PJ inquiry.

SY is facing an issue of timing with these rogatory letters. 

The 5th rogatory is about hearing people. The 6th about forensics. The 5th was supposed to have happened in September, the 6th has been anticipated because of the September events.

So we have this very peculiar situation of a diligence – hearing people of interest – happening but being obfuscated by the one that is to follow it – the forensics.

This lack of coordination has led the odd situation of hearing people of interest before knowing the results of the new forensic testing that is still to be done. 

Will a person of interest be asked “In case we find your DNA on the curtains of the apartment, can you please explain why it was there? Please answer freely because we will disregard this question in case the result comes back negative about you. We’re just trying to save you and us time and an extra trip here in case it comes back positive, hope you understand.”

We think Operation Grange’s operation room must be similar to a studio of an animated movie: filled with storyboards to fit storylines. We think the only investigation done there is to come to a conclusion about what story is to be spun and coming, we hope, to the conclusion the only story that now is viable is the truth.

The storyboard with the 5th rogatory was to hear the persons of interest without the forensic cards being yet on the table. It was meant to draw attention to some people specifically. The 5th rogatory has a very clear objective and we’re afraid it might be missed because of this mistiming.

About the 5th rogatory the 05NOV Correio da Manhã has these 2 key phrases that we think important: “in the list for questioning, as CdM found out, there are about ten people, between Portuguese and British” and “among the new SY suspects, as CdM found out, there are former Ocean Club employees, the place from where the child disappeared in May 2007, and residents of Praia da Luz, Lagos.”

Remember how we have been explaining how the circle of “people of interest” has progressively widened?

First it was the Ocean Club employees, then Ocean Club itself, followed Portuguese locals. Now the level of this particular part of the game has moved up a significant notch: “British” and “resident in PdL”. Or, as they are commonly known, ex-Pats.

Another key-phrase of the 05NOV Correio da Manhã article is this: “these are people who British investigators consider suspects of involvement in the disappearance of Maddie, following the theory that the child was abducted during a failed burglary.”

SY looked for a body in June2014, having said before there were reasons to believe that Maddie was dead when she left the apartment and now the renewed interest for forensics, we think we all agree that abduction is not the correct word to be used. No one abducts a dead body.

So let’s play along and correct the phrase in accordance with what appears to be SY’s storyline: “these are people who British investigators consider suspects of involvement in the disappearance of Maddie, following the theory that the child was killed and taken during a failed burglary.”

This sounds more like it. More like the whitewashing so many believe is happening.

Let’s continue to play along with this and bring in the forensics.

Where the 04NOV Jornal de Noticias and 04NOV Express articles differ is their emphasis on SY’s interest in hairs or curtains.

The 04NOV Express refers to 98 hairs with no DNA results and 19 with partial results and that in order to re-test hairs, a 6th rogatory letter will be required. This may involve a request to take the material to the UK. The location of these unidentified hairs in apartment 5A isn’t specified but no mention of curtains.

05NOV Correio da Manhã mentions a 6th rogatory request for a re-analysis of hair samples and curtain fabric.

Re-analysis means the items have already been analysed. The only curtains which have been analysed are the living room curtains. No hairs were found on the curtains when they were examined.

So it seems SY are interested in evidence from the living room. Curtains which may have stains that contain material yielding DNA evidence. Just like stain 16.

There seem to be legitimate concerns expressed by various blogs about a possible request by SY to take the material to the UK for testing, given the traumatic experiences with the FSS in 2007/2008.

Why to the UK? Are testing methods in Portugal inferior to those in the UK and if however unlikely that is so, why not tests in an independent lab in another country?

One of the concerns expressed has been the possibility of “contamination” of the samples once received in the UK. And an attempt to link this “evidence” with a chosen “abductor”, whether living or dead.

Raymond Hewlett, deceased, was once considered to be a likely candidate; at least for knowing what had happened, if not for his direct involvement, but the moment for his candidacy seems to have passed. Who can forget the allegedly incriminating letter burned by his son?  Could he, in all seriousness, ever be revived as a suspect?

Now, we’ll play LET’S SUPPOSE… and look at the obstacles SY would have to overcome in order to achieve a whitewash.

LET’S SUPPOSE Portugal agree to samples of curtains and hair being taken to the UK for testing.

Would they not request some oversight of the procedures and retention of some control samples?

But LET’S SUPPOSE they don’t and SY are now free to request the as yet unspecified lab to “find” some incriminating evidence. 

LET’S SUPPOSE the lab agrees, despite the extremely serious nature of what they are involved in and produces the “find”.

LET’S SUPPOSE SY have DNA samples of a suspect/s which just happens to match the “find”. They have the Abductor/s!

LET’S SUPPOSE the “Abductor” is alive. Is he meekly going to plead guilty? Would any amount of money or threats make an innocent person confess to the crime of the century, with the prospect of serving a custodial sentence as the most reviled man in Portugal? The most reviled man in the UK? The most reviled man in the world?

This, lest we forget, is the crime of the XXI century. This is the £10,000,000 criminal. And that's just counting what the Brit taxpayer has paid up to now. Add what the Portuguese have paid and he comes second to none in being the most expensive criminal of all time.

And what of his family? Will his family live with the fame of having one of its members as the world’s most notorious criminal without being it? Won’t he take that into account before confessing?

But LET’S SUPPOSE he does confess. Would that be the end of the mystery?

Of course not! The press would begin a new news-feeding frenzy. Every detail of his life would be raked over, strange anomalies in his abduction story would be noted.

The reputation of Portugal would be tarnished. ONLY the UK police were able to resolve this crime. Portugal had failed to apprehend him.

What would happen if he retracted his confession in prison and decided to appeal against his sentence? And spilled the beans about any inducement to plead guilty.

But, more importantly, would he be able to demonstrate what became of Madeleine?

LET’S SUPPOSE he decides to plead not guilty. Then all the evidence, dogs in apartment and cars, contradictory statements by T9, challenges to forensic evidence, an alibi previously unknown to SY… would all be resurrected. 

LET’S SUPPOSE he is found guilty. Then most of the above applies. Surely there would be an outcry in Portugal about a miscarriage of justice? And a UK police force have conspired to send a man to prison for life. If this ever emerges, it will have severe consequences for those involved.

LET’S SUPPOSE a living abductor is too risky.

LET’S SUPPOSE instead that SY can match the “Find” to a dead paedophile who they can place in PdL on May 3rd. Forensic evidence with a suspect who could have been elsewhere will not do. Far too suspicious, with shades of Barry George and Jill Dando.

Would SY be able produce any evidence of what happened to Maddie as a result of this conclusion?

Would the story end here?  Would Portugal accept this outcome with resignation?

Then a final - LET’S SUPPOSE …

Can UK rely on the £10,000,000 man, on his family and on all who know him to be a patsy to keep their mouths shut forever?

Some years later, files emerge, politicians change, people face death and their conscience nags, new facts or alibi information is forthcoming, partners confess to new partners – loyalties change and ex-partners refuse to keep dark secrets, someone decides to sell a very big story...

It’s not unknown for some or many of these things to have occurred in real life crimes and this case has badly shaken the confidence of many bloggers in our justice systems. It’s not surprising that a whitewash is suspected, given the antics of SY digging in Portugal.  We have had to contemplate that possibility, but given the high-profile nature of this case, we also have to ask if it’s really a viable option.

Apart from the truth, are any other possible scenarios?

Maybe the only one is for SY, after £10 million, 3 years and massive publicity, is to say “We believe it was an unknown abductor, but we don’t know who or why or where Maddie is.” - which would bring them back to the position where they started. 

Explain that to the taxpayers of the UK. 

Explain to taxpayers all about the Maddie PdL JUN2014 Circus. Explain to taxpayers the renewed interest in forensics. Explain to taxpayers the list of people of interest. Explain to taxpayers the reasons they believed Maddie left the apartment dead.

We can’t see this happening. It’s gone way too far for that.

And the following has to be asked: if whitewashing was the pursued objective, why bring up the forensic trilogy so much feared by the BH: hair, blood, Scenic’s boot? Like we showed in our “Frontline News” post the 28OCT Correio da Manhã article says “25 samples of blood and saliva and three other vestiges found in the room from where the child disappeared and in the boot of a car”.

Bringing the car (Scenic) into the picture and specifically its boot, is to automatically exclude anything that doesn't have to do with the McCanns. And that includes any alleged bungled burglary.

And why bring in British ex-Pats (if this is the case, we will be waiting to see as it hasn’t happened yet) for questioning? What can they possibly have to do with a burglary done by locals and/or Ocean Club employees?

Many people are being involved. Too many for a whitewash, in our opinion. 05NOV Correio da Manhã article says that in July, besides the 4 “July arguidos”, “at the time, eleven witnesses were also heard”. We confess we didn't realise 15 people had been heard then. If one adds the new 10, then that totals 25 people.

Maybe the correct phrase in the 05NOV Correio da Manhã article should be “these are people who British investigators consider suspects of involvement in the disappearance of Maddie, following the theory that the child was killed and taken from apartment.” Maybe that's the way that sentence really is being read by some.

To those who may think we support SY, we don’t. We think it’s shameful, to say the least, to have the Met play the clown in such a sickening circus.

We are bystanders in this process, but as Redwood once said “We are fighting for Madeleine” (not “We are fighting over Madeleine”)

Our mission is to pressure those who are making decisions for SY into having SY do the right thing. We do that by explaining why any other option than the truth will only make worse an already more than oversized problem.

In this post we tried to imagine what we would do if we were Andy Redwood and asked to find someone other than the McCanns/T7 to blame for what happened to Maddie. Apart from coming up with a zero result, which would be safe but humiliating, anything else requires him and some of his team at least, to undertake a series of criminal activities in order to send an innocent person to prison, or find a convincing dead person to fit the bill, leaving Portugal humiliated in the process.

With very little, not to say any, chance of success.

Want an example of a misfired creation? The abduction. So much has been done to create it. Using almost limitless resources by the powerful and influential and yet it fails to convince anyone.

The same is certain to happen if the £10,000,000 man is indeed to be created.

We are fighting for a justice system that applies to everyone and one in which we can place our trust. LET’S SUPPOSE it’s possible.


  1. Thanks for this post. Agree wholeheartedly and I amongst many am hoping that SY play their part in assuring a justice system that applies to everyone and one in which we can place our trust. When we cant believe in our justice system we dont have much else.

  2. Lets pretend Operation Grange & Portugal have been getting along just fine from the start of the review, plenty of time to invent crechedads, burgundy mans, tractormans etc Lets pretend SY have used their regular updates with the McCanns to control what comes out in the media (via Clarence) whilst showing with the other hand K&G are so far out of the loop, which shows the spin masters have been played.
    The above keeps the players on board but they know they are fighting for their lives which has seen them make early moves & big mistakes.

    The Mirror reported that SY have been visiting Portugal on average once a week which OG must have forgotten to update K&G with?
    Truth, half truth or downright lies...that is how to view any report (including police) associated with the vanishing of Madeleine McCann & depending how you read them it could be viewed as not a whitewash, half a whitewash or a complete whitewash.

    The Old Bailey awaits but awaits how many?

    Matt Wright

  3. Never mind the whitewash..... consider the exit (retirement) of Redwood as the slate being wiped clean, and DARE I say it starting all over again, with a new broom !

  4. That PJ was looking for a foreigner who had left the country? << If they are looking for a foreigner who has left the country then the suspect (s) by default cannot be Portuguese.
    We know of 9 foreigners who left the country who are involved up to their eyeballs in the case.
    They are the mccanns and their chums the tapas 7.
    Brits are foreigners when they are abroad, it always ends up pointing straight back to the mccanns and chum.

  5. Unpublished Otto Willum Nielsen at 7 Nov 2014 13:36:00,

    Thank you for your views, but we don't want to link the Maddie case to the other cases you are investigating. It's complex enough on it's own.

  6. I liked reading. I will read again. David Steel

  7. The following article via The Sunday Times was why the Mc's won their recent libel payout from Murdoch. Not sure if this has been posted before?

    IMO, it again serves to prove that the fake abduction theory and at the very least throws serious questions at them about neglect, although we know that they didn't neglect anyone this was just part of making the fake abduction plausible.

    Madeleine McCann: critical new evidence is from five-year-old suppressed report

    Critical new evidence at the centre of the reinvigorated hunt for Madeleine McCann came from a suppressed report by ex-MI5 investigators.

    By Ben Farmer7:35PM GMT 27 Oct 2013

    The evidence, including e-fits of a man seen carrying a child the night the toddler disappeared, was included in an intelligence report produced by a firm of former spies for her parents in 2008.
    But the report was sidelined for five years by Gerry and Kate McCann because it was critical of people involved and would have caused a distraction if made public, The Sunday Times reported.
    The team of hand-picked former MI5 agents was hired by the McCanns in the spring of 2008, 10 months after their daughter disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz.
    A report they produced was “hypercritical” of the McCanns and their friends and the authors were threatened with legal action if it were ever published, the paper reported.
    Its contents were kept secret until Scotland Yard detectives conducting a fresh review of the case contacted the author for a copy.

    1. The above link is an 'Error 404' page, maybe try :

      Amazing that which the mccanns accused others of, eg. investigation hindered, are emphatically pointing out that they themselves are the culprits in this crime.

    2. The Sunday Times had to admit that they were wrong about the e-fits being withheld from the the PJ, the SY and Leicestershire Police. The McCanns threatened of course the publisher of this paper, as they always do. According to the famous Carter Ruck Ltd, the McCanns sent these e-fit based on the so called Smith sighting to the parties concerned. However, the McCanns have indeed withheld these very important pieces of evidence from the public, that is from everybody who for more than 7 years have been taking great interest in this case and from all those who have supported them financially and emotionally over the years. Why did they keep those e-fits secret from us all. There was not any on-going investigation anywhere, so they knew of cours that nobody would do anything about them. McCanns do not even respect those who support them and who provide them with Money!!!

    Edmondson sentenced to 8 months imprisonment for phone hacking.
    At Leveson, who should we believe about K's diaries? Edmondson who is in prison, or Myler, who isn't?

  9. The Orwellian Child

    It is an inescapable fact the net result of the McCanns’ multi-million dollar PR effort has become an all-out assault on good taste and freedom of speech.

    In so doing, the McCanns’ actions have aroused more suspicion about their role concerning the fate of their daughter than rallied support.

    By any stretch, their campaign to find Madeleine has been an embarrassing, vicious disaster summed up by the death of Brenda Leyland. The irony for the McCanns is she now looms larger offline than she ever did on it.

    Orwell’s classic novel “1984” described the voluminous images of the glaring, black mustachioed “Big Brother” surrounding Air Strip One. In subsequent television and film adaptations, he appears as a hybrid of Hitler and Stalin.

    Who would have thought the face of Big Brother in the 21st Century is fast becoming that of a three-year-old English girl with a coloboma?

    IMO - never a truer word said...


    As it's Remembrance Day today, thought readers might like to read some poems.
    At 11th hour, a silence takes place. Everyone stands still.
    It is the 11th hour.

    1. thankyou textusa xx

    2. Isn't Remembrance day on the 11th November?!
      "at the 11th hour of the 11th day of the 11th month"

      Today it's Remembrance Sunday

  11. Textusa

    Re: SY doing the right thing. Yes I wish this would happen. But I don't think they care about the "right thing". Only covering up what they do not want us to know. When the Review/Investigation started IMO it served to quieten the clamour for justice and to save jobs at SY. The time and money mean nothing to those involved in the cover-up. I believe they will go on and on and on. Until we, the general public request they stop spending our money on this Investigation which produces no answers. It's sad and defeating to think that whatever happens they, whoever they are, will always have full control of what we are allowed to know. That is not to say I won't keep demanding the Truth from those who wish to deny our right to it.


    Seven more British and Portuguese citizens to be made arguidos in Maddie case

    English police

    by Marisa Rodrigues

    They know Praia da Luz. They know each other. They made phone calls on the night of the disappearance. Some have a criminal record over small crimes. Others are former Ocean Club workers. Seven Portuguese and British citizens fit this profile and for Scotland Yard (SY), these are the new suspects in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

    The group is going to be made arguido and questioned by Polícia Judiciária (PJ) officers, who will also question four witnesses under request from the British authorities. The list of eleven includes, at least, one woman. The diligences are scheduled for the last week of November at the Southern Directory, in Faro. They are part of the fifth letter rogatory and have been authorised by the new Public Ministry prosecutor in Portimão, Inês Sequeira, whom the inquiry has been redistributed to.

    11 suspects already

    These new seven [arguidos] join the four men that have been made arguidos and questioned in July. The British investigation now has eleven suspects. SY’s thesis is maintained. On the 3rd of May of 2007, there was a failed burglary at apartment 5A where the McCann couple left their children alone while they went out for dinner; Madeleine, then 3 years old, woke up and was abducted so she could not recognise and denounce the intruders; the crime may have been carried out by one of the arguidos or by several of them, in association. This was one of the theories that the PJ followed back then, and was discarded because of a lack of indications of a break-in to the apartment.

    SY’s new investigation phase appears at a time when the British press reports that Andy Redwood’s team was reduced and now has less members. The detectives are expected to request the PJ’s National Directory authorisation to watch the questioning and interrogations in Faro, just like they did in July.

    in: Jornal de Notícias, 10.11.2014, paper edition/e-paper

  13. Same article, translated by Joana:

    Seven more Portuguese and British Arguidos (suspects) in the Maddie case
    10 November 2014 | Posted by Joana Morais Leave a Comment

    by Marisa Rodrigues

    They know Praia da Luz. They know each other. They made phone calls on the night of the disappearance. Some have a record for petty crimes. Others are former workers from the Ocean Club. Seven Portuguese and British nationals fit in this profile, and are now, for Scotland Yard (SY) the new suspects of Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

    The group is going to be constituted as arguido [formal suspect] and interrogated by the Judiciary Police (PJ), who are also going to question four witnesses at the request of the British authorities. In the list of the eleven people there is at least one woman.

    The proceedings are scheduled for the last week of November, at the PJ's South Directorate in Faro. They appear in the fifth rogatory letter and were authorized by the new prosecutor at the Public Ministry of Portimão, Inês Sequeira, to whom the process was assigned.

    These new seven arguidos will join the other four men constituted as arguidos and questioned in July. The British investigation now has eleven suspects.

    The Scotland Yard thesis remains unchanged. On May 3, 2007, there was a failed robbery at the apartment 5A where the McCanns left their three children alone to go to dinner. Madeleine, then aged three, woke up and was abducted so she wouldn't recognize and accuse the intruders - a crime that may have been committed by one of the arguidos or by several, in association. This was one of the theories followed by the PJ at the time [2007] and eventually dismissed due to the lack of evidence that a burglary had ever taken place at the apartment.

    The new phase of the SY investigation comes at a time when the British press reported that Andy Redwood's team was scaled back and now has fewer people working on it.

    The English detectives will have to request the permission of the National Directorate of the PJ to be able to follow the inquiries and interrogatories in Faro, as it happened in July.

    in Jornal de Notícias, Nov. 10, 2014 (paper edition)

  14. British now included!
    This is saying she is dead. If it was to silence her. And nothing to do with pedophiles or rings.
    Burglary has to be SY cover story otherwise it points straight to Mcs. But who will buy burglary gone wrong without questioning it if that was a final conclusion?

  15. Surely no one will buy a three year old was murdered because the burgalars stole erm nothing? What was robbed. Anything? To murder a child through fear of discovery of stealing what? So a person/s have broken into an apartment with the intention to steal. Instead within a few moments they go from thief to giving up thieving and then steam right into child murderer. IF this is the way SY are playing this then something of immense value and shrouded in secrecy, was in that apartment and stolen along with the cadaver of MM. In order for the child to have had to die then she knew who the thiefs were. I won't even go into the time frame needed for a cadaver to lay, long enough for a dog to get the scent.

  16. Burglar - child cries out - takes crying child away - never! Man seen had sleeping child.
    Burglar - child cries ou t- kills her - takes dead body! But why, when he could leave empty- handed and worst crime if caught is breaking in? Not even theft.
    Didn't OC employee know children were sleeping? If he didn't, he can't have consulted reception book.

    How did Maddie recognise him in the dark?
    How would she know his name?
    Would they take 4 year old on an identity parade, ask her to pick out the man? Ridiculous.
    How did he kill her without leaving evidence? Did he clean and take cloths with him?
    Why would all these arguidos defend him and help him?
    Are Murat and Michaela being reinterviewed?

  17. None of that scenario makes sense to me and so it won't to any detective. The planned crime, to steal valuables. There would have been a car. A disturbed and crying child would be left while the intruders flew out of the front door and sped away in their car.
    A child killed accidentally in panic would have been left also.
    A drowsy child of that age would not be able to pick out a stranger and in what would be a minor crime I cant see any police organising a line up or asking a little girl to help make an e fit.
    If the child had been left for dead or dead the crime would be much more serious, but I still think that would have happened rather than abduction of a corpse.
    Why get so panicked over a crying child to the extent you would even cause her accidental harm? Is the thesis a hand over the mouth and suffocation ? If that happened the petty criminals would have fled in terror imo

    Euclides, curtains (not specified as bedroom now) and hairs all mentioned.

    Now it's 2 women. And East European mentioned.

  20. CEOP failed
    What an odious excuse for a human being

  21. So the latest 'theory' is if you were in Portugal in early May 2007 and on a mobile to someone you knew, you're a suspect burglar, turned murderer! That's quality detective work for £10m, no wonder the Mc's deleted all their phone calls and texts!

    Face DNA tests
    I wonder who these 2 Brits are? Are they a couple?
    Are they the" soothing couple" we heard about months ago? It gets stranger.
    I can't imagine a story that a local couple took M would be the intention. That would be too stupid.

    1. The first thing Kate said in the morning after the disappearnce of Madeleine, which a female social worker from the UK overheard (it's in the PJ files) was; A couple has taken her..a couple has taken her. So Kate knew at that time that a couple had taken Madeleine. We do not know why she knew it then and I do not think I have heard it from her since. So this may explain why we now have a couple as suspect. We shall not underestimate what Kate, Gerry and all of their tapas friend are able to recall and better understand weeks, months, years after their first interviews. Maybe Kate now remember seeing a couple that awful day seven and a half years ago. Just like Jane Tanner's ever improving and more detailed description of the so called "eggman",Kate may now perhaps be able to identify the couple she saw that day, which she unconsciously have suppressed all those years. These people are extraordinary, we cannot stop admiring their psychological skill!

  23. Last night the questioning of witnesses/suspects was on the news on TV in Portugal. But I noticed a very interesting thing: all news were very clear in wanting us to know that these were SY suspects and not PJ ones. That PJ doesn't consider them as suspects.

  24. I have been banned from JH forum so will have to find a new home! I have been banned for disruption. Maybe I should take it as an honour - I dont think I 've ever disrupted anything in my life! Desperate times

    1. Sorry, meant to have added my name, HelenMeg. But this is the place I value most in terms of commentary and pertinent information on the case.

    2. I'm sorry to hear this, HelenMeg. I always found your posts to be honest and detailed. I never experienced you being 'disruptive.'

      You were never scared to mention the swinging theory either.

    3. Welcome HelenMeg

  25. 11.11.2014 11:30
    Três britânicos suspeitos do desaparecimento de Maddie
    Entre os suspeitos está ainda uma outra mulher estrangeira

  26. >

  27. >

    São chamados a responder à lista de perguntas preparadas pela Scotland Yard e que recebeu luz verde do Ministério Público. Tese de assalto falhado ao apartamento não é seguida pela PJ
    Por: Redação / Marisa Rodrigues, TVI | ontem às 15:08

  28. Does Redwood and his crew realise that if they are suggesting that robbery/burglary turned to murder abduction, it blows the Mc's 'checking' timeline out of the water? SY have said that the T7 and the Mc's are not suspects so if they find their 'patsy' then they confirm the Mc's and their associates as liars. So why would the Mc's and crew lie if they hadn't done anything wrong or didn't have anything to hide? Oh dear, what incompetence...

  29. Su, unpublished at 12 Nov 2014 06:27:00,

    Thank you for your observations but not publishing as we dont agree with those particular theories.

    Times are not crazier than they have been, Maddie's case has just helped us see what was before our eyes all the time.


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.