Friday, 30 October 2015


1. Introduction

For us the Mirror article of October 24 “Madeleine McCann detectives examine former suspect's pictures of children after Sunday People probe” is one very positive and major step towards having the real and full truth about the Madeleine case come finally to light.

A step that has gone unnoticed in its importance. Much has been said about it but all have missed how really important we think it is.

First of all it’s an historic article. For the first time in the history of humankind a British tabloid reports on a middle aged man admitting to photographing children of strangers and seems to find that acceptable.

The article has all the ingredients of similar ones in which the minimal suspicion of paedophilia serves to roast without mercy:

“after he told Sunday People investigators he enjoyed taking snaps of children on holiday”,

“Mr Krokowski told our ¬investigators he liked taking pictures of ¬children while he was on trips abroad”,

“he admitted he enjoys taking pictures of ¬children on holiday but ¬that it was for ¬artistic purposes.”

Where is the word “pervert” in the article? And “disgusting”? And the two put together as we have always seen in articles with similar content? Where is the “disgusting pervert”??

Nowhere. And that apparently doesn’t fire up red flags anywhere.

Wojciech Krokowski even goes on to recognise that his wife “had some problems with alcohol and petty crimes over the years” and that isn’t used by the tabloid against them.

Have we changed planets and weren’t informed?

(image from the Mirror)

What if all of the above had been said by Raymond Hewlett? Would the article be anywhere as lenient? No, it would most certainly not.

So why is this article incomprehensibly mild towards Wojciech Krokowski, the photographer of children of strangers?

The reason for us is simple and very important: it’s a clear message to all who are able to read it stating that FULL TRUTH is the way that is intended to proceed in the Maddie case.

Please read it again. Comprehend it fully please. That’s how important this article about Wojciech Krokowski is in our opinion.

2. Wojciech Krokowski, the facts

Wojciech Krokowski comes into the process by the hand of Nuno Lourenço a Portuguese emigrant who says he was on holiday in Sagres with his family from April 23 to May 13.

Nuno Lourenço alleges that on April 29, Wojciech Krokowski tries twice to abduct his daughter in Sagres. First on the Mareta beach and then in the Praça da República.

Let’s stick to facts. Please note that allegations once made become fact to be taken into account even though their content may not be true:

- April 28 – Wojciech Krokowski arrives in Faro airport on April 28, where he hires a Renault Clio. They stay in an apartment in Burgau;

- April 29 – Nuno Lourenço alleges Wojciech Krokowski tries to abduct his daughter first at the beach and then in the Praça da República, Sagres. Nuno Lourenço says he photographs the rented car parked in this town square and produces this photo;

- May 2 – Wojciech Krokowski and wife are captured by CCTV in the Chiado Mall, Lisbon, exiting its FNAC shop. This image surfaces because the owner of a bar in Burgau, the “Beach Bar” has strongly raised the possibility that Wojciech Krokowski could have gone there to buy CDs of Portuguese music, and it’s confirmed that he did indeed purchase 2 of them. We don’t know when the conversation between the owner and Wojciech Krokowski took place but we are told the Polish tourist told the owner that besides Lisbon he would also likely visit Évora, the main city in Alentejo known for its Roman temple of Diana, returning on the same day;

- May 3 – Maddie disappears;

- May 4 – Nuno Lourenço alleges to have seen again Wojciech Krokowski in the Praça da República when he was killing time in the process of hiring a car. Seeing Wojciech Krokowski for the third time apparently disturbs him as he says he speaks about it to his wife when he returns home, we would guess around 15H00. He makes a connection between the attempted abduction of his daughter and Maddie’s disappearance. His wife recommends he speaks to the police about it;

- May 5 – Wojciech Krokowski at 06H45 hands over his rented car in Faro airport and flies back home with his wife. On this same day, after allegedly getting the police number from a newspaper, Nuno Lourenço calls PJ and reports the “Sagresman sighting”.

3. Some important clarifications

As the reader will see, we think that Nuno Lourenço is being very, very economical with the truth. We are not alone in this but we couldn’t agree less with the conclusions others have withdrawn from this, as we hope to show.

The conclusions they reach from this are significantly different from ours but that’s fully their right and we respect that unconditionally.

To disagree on content is in no way disrespect but only the expression of diversity of opinion.

However when someone says that this is Wojciech Krokowski’s rented car, that someone is being factually incorrect:

The picture above is taken by the PJ and that is very clear in the files.

It would be extremely odd for the PJ to photograph Wojciech Krokowski’s rented car in Sagres after it had been handed back over to the rental company in Faro.

Wojciech Krokowski’s rented car is a Renault Clio, the one photographed above is a Vauxhall/Opel Corsa.

PJ, as expected, is only able to photograph the space in the Praça da República where the car had been, where Nuno Lourenço has photographed the vehicle:

This is the photograph of Wojciech Krokowski’s rented car taken by Nuno Lourenço:

To use the wrong vehicle and from it draw conclusions only shows very poor researching and by association ridicules us all who research the case.

As is calling Nuno Lourenço by a name other than his own or by stating that he’s Spanish. He clearly says “he’s of Portuguese nationality” in his statement if there was any doubt about that. He’s a Portuguese emigrant who resides in Germany.

4. Textusa sisters visit Sagres

As we said in our “Praia da Luz” post, we left the village earlier than anticipated and headed for Sagres having changed our plans intending on having lunch there.

We arrived around half past noon in Sagres. A little too early for lunch, we thought.

We all had a very hearty typical English breakfast that morning in a very quaint esplanade in the town where we were staying so no one was really feeling hungry and so we all decided to first visit the “Sagresman sighting” and then either visit the fortress and follow it with lunch or do it the other way around.

We came into Sagres by the long straight that is N268 and on the roundabout near the fortress we turned left on Rua de S. Vicente and went to the next roundabout at Praça da República. We entered that square and parked the car on the dead-end located at its Southern corner.

There we walked to the “Pastelaria Marreiros” esplanade (yellow dotted line), the exact same one Nuno Lourenço says he sat at with his family when the alleged abduction there was supposed to have taken place.

There we had tea, coffee and bottled water and talked to each other about the sighting (very little to talk about) but mostly about the historical meaning that Sagres had to the world as it was from there that Henry, the Navigator is said to have opened the doors to globalisation.

Once we decided to leave, we walked to our car and drove out of Praça da República by its only exit, which is the narrow nameless road that Google Maps calls N268-2.

Important to note that if one drives in the Praça da República, the N268-2 is the only way out of it. Not very practical because it makes one go all the way to the fortress but that’s the way it is.

For us it was alright because we intended to visit the fortress anyway.

5. Nuno Lourenço and Wojciech Krokowski at the beach

We won’t go much into what Nuno Lourenço alleges to have happened on the beach between him and Wojciech Krokowski. We will just say that it is as ridiculous as what he later has to say about what is supposed to have happened in the Praça da República.

To say he hears three or four clicks coming from a camera held by a strange middle aged man fully clothed on the beach pointing it to his children and do nothing is absurd.

To say he continues to hear the clicking continuing as the man took “more pictures of 2 children of male gender” sons of a couple next to him and to say he limits his reaction to only looking at said stranger with camera in a “spiteful and aggressive” manner is absurd.

Please note that Nuno Lourenço is fully conscious from the first click he hears of what the man’s intention is and yet allows him to continue taking pictures and when he finally reacts is only with an aggressive look.

But what’s interesting is the conclusion that Nuno Lourenço comes to about this picture taking: the man is taking pictures because he means to abduct.

Who has ever heard of pre-abduction pictures taken in front of the victims parents? Apparently Nuno Lourenço has otherwise he couldn’t have come to the conclusion he does.

According to him it’s perfectly logical for an abductor to first raise suspicions about his presence and only after certifying that he was noticed, abduct.

Note that Wojciech Krokowski, according to Nuno Lourenço, once threatened by the hostile look starts to retreat but does in an absolutely defiant manner: “…they looked at the individual in a spiteful and aggressive manner which made him abandon the sand. Before that and while walking back he took further pictures of the 4 children, of his in a dissimulated manner and of the others with the camera by his face and a knee in the sand”.

Two grown men, Nuno Lourenço and another man, allow this to happen? They allow a stranger who is taking pictures of their children to continue to do so? Especially when Nuno Lourenço thinks the man will use the pictures of his children in “an illicit manner”?

6. The esplanades of Praça da República

If we thought Praia da Luz was smaller and much more compact than we had anticipated then what can one say about Praça da República?

One reading Nuno Lourenço’s statement one is filled with the sensation of space. This is what he says:

“At a certain point in time, and while he drank a coffee he saw the individual enter the pastry shop square [“largo da pastelaria” – we think he means the square where Pastelaria Marreiros is located so is referring to the Praça da República], going around the esplanades by their exterior, always observing the children and went into the referred pastry shop. At that moment, as usual ran around the tables, which caused her to distance herself when she made a part of the circle. Observing this the individual started to walk quickly towards his daughter, to make a coincidence of when she was furthest away from her parents. By chance or fate, her daughter stopped near the deponent and the individual, his supposed intentions foiled, entered again the pastry shop and went out without having bought anything, going to the back of a kiosk that exists in the square. Completely worn out with this situation, in which he doesn’t doubt that his intention was to grab his daughter, got up holding his phone and took several pictures of the individual.”

The “going around the esplanades by their exterior”, “caused her to distance herself when she made a part of the circle”, “to make a coincidence of when she was furthest away from her parents” and “entered again the pastry shop and went out without having bought anything, going to the back of a kiosk that exists in the square” give the idea that all happened in a large area.

But calling a barn Royal Albert Hall doesn’t make the barn any bigger than it really is.

Even more than in Luz, where reality showed us that it wasn’t anywhere as big as we had imagined it to be, we saw immediately in that town square that where Nuno Lourenço described what had happened couldn’t ever have happened because it was much, much smaller than we imagined it would be.

It would be so ridiculous that it does make it impossible to have happened.

First problem Nuno Lourenço has with the story is that he chooses the wrong esplanade to sit at.

The Marreiros esplanade is in the middle of the other esplanades. That means that if his daughter was circling the tables then he would have to be circling all the esplanades. And if she was circling all esplanades then it wouldn’t be possible for her trajectory at the farthest point to  bring her near the deponent no matter how lucky or fateful.

And we’re talking about a 4 yr old and a roundabout at the end of the square. Would any parent let a toddler that age near such a roadway?

If she was circling only the Marreiros esplanade then she would be very close to her father.

7. Let the abduction (?) begin

Nuno Lourenço makes Wojciech Krokowski to be the unthinkable of a prospective abductor. He places the abductor between himself and whole esplanade full of tables and the getaway car.

Nuno Lourenço says that Wojciech Krokowski goes into the pastry shop and as he’s doing that is when he decides to intercept Nuno Lourenço’s daughter. Once foiled in his intent, instead of walking away, Wojciech Krokowski goes back into the pastry shop. Isn’t that the most ridiculous thing a man can do after having just tried and failed to abduct a girl right in front of her father?

He then comes out without buying anything (how does Nuno Lourenço know this?) and heads towards the back of the kiosk that exists on the North end of the square.

Nuno Lourenço watched all passively sitting down.

Only when Wojciech Krokowski goes behind the kiosk does he get up.

Nuno Lourenço wants us to believe that he sees a man trying to abduct again his daughter – a couple of hours after the same man had been run off by him at the beach (with his very spiteful and aggressive stare which didn’t stop him from taking pictures with a knee on the ground) – and only gets up and reacts AFTER Wojciech Krokowski has gone in and out of the pastry shop right in front of him.

Was he waiting for Wojciech Krokowski to settle his bill before taking any action so as to make sure owner of the pastry shop would be paid? Oh, that wasn’t it because the man didn’t buy anything. He was there to abduct not to purchase!

And what is Nuno Lourenço’s reaction? At the beach it was to stare but here he decides to take action: he goes after Wojciech Krokowski taking photographs of the man!

He says he takes several pictures of the individual but “unfortunately, it didn’t work as he had the finger on the phone’s camera’s lens”. He never takes the finger off the lens for several photos? All several of them? Amazing.

8. Understanding the stage

Nuno Lourenço says this next:

“Even then and when going to the to the back of the kiosk he saw that that the individual was now behind the wheel of a vehicle, of the brand “Renault”, “Clio” model (very recent), silver, noting the licence plate on a piece of paper that meanwhile has thrown away, as he will explain. That individual was accompanied by a woman, sitting on the passenger seat. This time he was able to take a photo of the vehicle, which he supplied to the police and that he exhibits now, insisting [fazendo questão] in showing the time, 18H08 of 29/04/2007 as registered on the phone”.

We have been told that Wojciech Krokowski was forced to leave the beach about 2 hours before by Nuno Lourenço and another man.

What de he do during this time? Was Wojciech Krokowski hiding somewhere to give Nuno Lourenço time to finish his beach time, get himself and his family dressed and walk up to the Praça da República?

Did Wojciech Krokowski sit on a esplanade there for those 2 hours? We think very unlikely as although the space in that town square is pleasant it neither has a scenic view nor does it provide anything else of real interest. It’s one of those kind of places where one is either entertained with conversation and time passes or one doesn’t spend much time there.

Even if he did sit there for over 2 hours, wouldn’t Nuno Lourenço have seen him sitting there when he arrived instead of saying he saw him enter the square?

The only other option would be for Wojciech Krokowski to have driven around for those 2 hours and then return. But if he did drive around and returned there, then Nuno Lourenço should have seen him enter the scene by exiting the car and he doesn’t.

But independent of Wojciech Krokowski having parked the car there before he went to the beach or if he drove around and parked there, choosing that place to park the car is completely absurd for someone wanting to abduct a child.

As we said, once one drives into Praça da República the only possible exit is by doing a a tight and narrow “S” on the square and exit by the very narrow N268-2

No question Wojciech Krokowski wants to abduct. Nuno Lourenço has made that very clear.

So having 4 options of a quick getaway (blue arrows), Wojciech Krokowski decides to chooses as escape route (red arrow) one that requires making corners in a very short space on the very narrow street of the square to get into the also very narrow road that is the N268-2.

Wouldn't have made much more sense if had the car parked in the roundabout, as shown below, leaving his wife behind the wheel, so that when he grabbed the little girl all he had to do was to run those 20 yards, get quickly into the car and both drive away?

Note, the potential abductor even makes his life much more difficult by parking in between 2 cars, which means that he has to manoeuvre to get out of there:

Go figure. Either quite a stupid abductor or a very poor script writer. We opt for the latter.

Now let’s understand distances we are confronted with:

The yellow dotted lines represent the distance of 10 metres. From the Marreiros esplanade to the Wojciech Krokowski’s rented car is parked about 20 metres (21 yards) from it.

The short distance between the esplanade and where the car was supposed to have been parked was what fascinated us the most while we were sitting there on the Marreiros esplanade.

We were certain that if we tried to throw something at the car from that distance we would hit it. We certainly could speak by just slightly raising our voice from where we were to someone standing near or sitting inside a car parked there.

The playing area of a tennis court is 26 yards long making it about 4 yards longer than from the esplanade to the parked car. And as far as we know, tennis players talk to each other without shouting. Any questions on the peculiarity of tennis please address them to one Gerald McCann please.

One cannot help but laugh out loud when picturing the abduction as described by Nuno Lourenço taking place in the esplanade where we were, having to pass by or near us toward a parked driverless car 20 yards away.

We hope that by now the reader has noticed that there’s a non-character in all of this: Nuno Lourenço’s wife, the girl’s mother.

First she watches a man taking pics of her children on the beach and then sees the same man trying to abduct her daughter and thinks best to stay out of both and let hubby take care of all.

9. The Charlie Chaplin & Harry Houdini moments

The stage is set (or should we say the miniscule stage is set?) so let’s go back to Nuno Lourenço’s words and see what we call the Charlie Chaplin moment of this pathetic play: when Nuno Lourenço chases Wojciech Krokowski around the square.

We saw how Wojciech Krokowski, after trying to kidnap a girl in front of her dad continues to stay around.

Walks in the pastry shop and walks out.

Nuno Lourenço, the father of the just-would-be-abducted girl, only then stands up and decides, finally, to do something decisive about it: go after Wojciech Krokowski and take pictures of him.

The red arrow refers to Wojciech Krokowski, the yellow one, Nuno Lourenço. Both arrows are marked with 10 metres marks.

Nuno Lourenço says that he “stood up, holding his cellphone and took several [várias] pictures of the individual, frontally and in a way that he saw he was taking those photos of him”.

So Nuno Lourenço wants Wojciech Krokowski to see him taking the pictures. That means that they are at a short distance one from the other.

But, then the comical magic happens.

Let’s see Nuno Lourenço describe it all in his own words: “when going to the back of the kiosk that the individual was now behind the wheel of a vehicle”.

This is where Nuno Lourenço is standing when he photographs the vehicle:

For the first 10 yards or so, they are interacting with each other but then in less space than that of a tennis court, Wojciech Krokowski gains such a distance from his “adversary” in such a way that it allows him to get to the car and get inside before Nuno Lourenço is able to see that!

Nuno Lourenço doesn’t see him getting in the car but sees him already in it. He’s very precise about that detail.

Either that kiosk has Twilight Zone properties or Wojciech Krokowski was running while Nuno Lourenço was limping along for the first to gain such an advantage in such short distance. No other explanation.

But this falls to the ground as Nuno Lourenço later says “after taking the picture, and having passed a few minutes, the couple took off in a calm and orderly manner”. So no hurry on Wojciech Krokowski’s part. It’s the kiosk that must have teletransporting properties.

But the magic doesn’t stop there.

As we saw Nuno Lourenço says that he sees Wojciech Krokowski behind the wheel of the car. He also says “that individual was accompanied by a woman, sitting in the passenger’s side. This time he was able to take a photograph of the vehicle, which he supplied to the police…”

The detail of the picture that is in the files:

We have now the Harry Houdini moment. Where are Wojciech Krokowski and his wife? Aren’t there supposed to be 2 people inside that car when the picture was taken? It clearly shows it’s empty!

So basically he’s telling us that a driverless car just drove away right in front of him.

And the magic simply doesn’t stop! It continues when he says “he noted the licence plate on a piece of paper which he meanwhile threw away”.

Let’s suppose that this piece of paper was some receipt he had in his wallet or pocket but one has to ask from where does the pen or pencil appear?

Nuno Lourenço has gone to the beach with his family. From the beach they head for an esplanade. From the esplanade he gets up on an impulse to go after Wojciech Krokowski to photograph him. His hands busy with his cellphone camera  So where in this whole scenario does a pen or pencil in his hand at that moment make sense? It doesn’t.

Only if he stopped at the kiosk to buy or ask for one and that would certainly explain why he let Wojciech Krokowski out of his sight long enough to give him time for him to get into the car without being seen.

However, not only nowhere in his narrative does he suggest he asked anything from the kiosk as to do that he would need to know Wojciech Krokowski was going to get into a car something he only realizes after he passes by the kiosk.

10. Let’s abandon absurdity to see the absurd

Now with all the details of what Nuno Lourenço says happened let’s stop for a moment and look at what he is really proposing for us to believe.

We will not be comical about it and will state only fact. As will be seen the ridiculousness of the thing stands out by itself without any outside help.

Nuno Lourenço says that a man tries to abduct his daughter in his presence. First at the beach although we don’t understand how nor when. Then at the Praça da República.

There, this man would have picked the little girl up right in front of her father and would have run to a car parked 20 yards away.

At the car he would have to open the back door and put the girl inside, close the door, go around the car and get in the driver’s seat as the other person with him, a woman, cannot act as a runaway driver as she is sitting in the passenger’s seat.

The man has to start the engine and has to manoeuvre to get out of the parking space, the drive away in a very narrow “S”, the escape route we have shown above and which is the only way out of Praça da República.

This would allow for many to see and register the licence plate of the car. A car that the man had rented in his real name so quickly traceable to him, as fact it would prove to be.

All of the above done in front of the girl’s father and mother, all in the space (except the “S” bit) of a tennis court.

Very, very poor scriptwriting we must say.

We hope that the reader can now picture how we laughed out loud when envisioning the above while sitting in the Marreiros esplanade and discussing this.

11. To report or not to report

Nuno Lourenço thinks Wojciech Krokowski has tried to abduct his daughter twice in two completely separate locations and in a 2 hour time difference.

Nuno Lourenço appears to be the first to understand what a real threat Wojciech Krokowski represents but decides not to report this to authorities.

He has Wojciech Krokowski’s licence plate and instead of taking it to the police he says he throws the paper away: “thinking that the licence number no longer had interest, as they had given up on their intention, he threw the paper with the licence plate away, not knowing if into a bin or to the floor”.

This is a man who supposedly just tried to kidnap his daughter. One would have hung on to that bit of paper for dear life. He’s gone to the trouble of following the man around and taking photos but throws away the licence number. Sheer nonsense

Instead Nuno Lourenço’s reasoning seems to be this, as Wojciech Krokowski had shown giving up on his intent to abduct then he no longer represented a threat.

But hadn’t Wojciech Krokowski, according to Nuno Lourenço, shown the same kind of loss of interest in abducting on the beach 2 hours earlier?

He had but 2 hours later, according to Nuno Lourenço, decided to prowl and attack again on the square.

Nuno Lourenço was a material witness that Wojciech Krokowski was set on abducting. That he could momentarily be convinced not to but he was set in doing so.

Wojciech Krokowski was such a potential abductor who had shown to be so obsessed that he even attacked the same family in the same afternoon in separate locations but not that far from one another.

Nuno Lourenço of all people should have realised that Wojciech Krokowski was a time bomb set to explode very soon and somewhere near.

Instead Nuno Lourenço seems to have preferred to ignore the threat.

He doesn’t even remember what he did with the paper with licence number, just that he threw it away. That’s how nonchalant he is about the incidents that involved the possible abduction of his own daughter.

Nuno Lourenço is only prompted to speak to the police after his third encounter with Sagresman.

12. Third encounter

Nuno Lourenço has arrived in Portugal on April 22 and intends to leave on May 13. On May 4 he decides to rent a car. He goes to a Travel Agency called “Turinfo”.

Nuno Lourenço says that it’s a car rental company but it’s not, it’s a Travel Agency. The nearest car rental company is in Lagos which makes sense.

Sagres and more specifically the parking area in front of the fortress must be the place in Portugal with the most rented cars per square yard.

But Sagres is a place one goes to in a rented car not one where one rents one.

Sagres is a destination not a point of entry/exit of the country. One rents car at Faro, or any major city in the Algarve but not in places like Sagres.

“Turinfo” is listed on the internet with an address of Praça da República. We were there and didn’t see it.

We saw restaurants/esplanades, lodgings and a surf-shop (the building in front of which Wojciech Krokowski’s car is photographed).

One the south side of Praça da República we have the “Mareta Beach Boutique Bed & Breakfast”, the “Algarve Surfcamp and Surfschool Amaro” and the “Rosa dos Ventos” restaurant:

On the North just coffee shops/restaurants and with the “RetroSailor Beach Shop” at the North tip:

On the cul-de-sac that exists on the South corner of the square we have lodgings called “Alojamento Particular” and “Mareta Beach Boutique Bed & Breakfast”:

We did not see any Travel Agency or anything named “Turinfo” on that town square but we won’t say or imply it doesn’t exist because as said, it’s listed on the internet. If anyone could tell us where it is, we would be grateful. We simply would like to know where it is located in Sagres.

We do find it strange that the owner, or manager, of the Travel Agency is the only one there who can rent a car to a client as Nuno Lourenço seems to say “the worker present said that he had to return at 13H30, time of her boss’s arrival”.

One has to wonder what that employee has been hired to do in the agency.

What is interesting is where Nuno Lourenço decides to go to kill the time: to a Restaurant called “Rosa dos Ventos” located at the South corner of the square.

“Rosa dos Ventos” and on the other side of the square “Marreiros” and other restaurants, have esplanades, where he can sit and enjoy a coffee and from where he can see the agency’s boss arrive, but instead he decides to go inside “Rosa dos Ventos”, instead of sitting outside in the esplanade, as shown in the picture below:

The photo above is taken by the PJ. The esplanade in the foreground is in front of “Rosa dos Ventos”.

Nuno Lourenço is clear he says he’s inside the restaurant: “looking to the outside, he saw the individual of the photos, dressed exactly the same way but without the hat. He went around the square and disappeared, not seeing him or the car again, because he was on foot and alone.”

From inside “Rosa dos Ventos” one has a clear vision of the Southern part of the square, so if Wojciech Krokowski passed by in a car, not only would it be a huge coincidence to be looking outside when he passed as he wouldn’t be able to detail what clothes the man was wearing.

Nuno Lourenço is saying clearly that Wojciech Krokowski is on foot.

But if  Wojciech Krokowski is indeed on foot and Nuno Lourenço gets disturbed by seeing him again shouldn’t he have exited the restaurant and followed the man even if only out of curiosity?

No, we seem to return into a world of magic again.

Wojciech Krokowski is seen on foot in front of “Rosa dos Ventos” going North (going around the square) and then as suddenly he got into the car days before he simply vanishes. Or doesn’t, we’re not sure. Nuno Lourenço speaks of being unable to follow him because he’s on foot and so implying Wojciech Krokowski has used a car in this encounter but doesn’t detail when or where he got in it. All very confusing, all just too fictional.

It’s not only the kiosk that’s haunted, it’s that entire square.

This is supposed to have happened between 13:00 and 13:30.

He then says “on arriving home he told his wife what had happened who told him to go to the police, now knowing about the disappearance of another child, with strong and haunting similarities to his daughter, (censored), which can be seen by the comparison of images. This way and on seeing the telephone number of this police [PJ] in a daily paper, right in the morning he called the picket, alerting to what happened”.

We are supposing he arrived home around 15:00 at the latest. He’s clearly disturbed, tells the wife about the encounter and she agrees with him that he should call the police. But, fascinatingly, he decides to procrastinate until the next day.

The world is being turned upside down about Maddie and he makes a clear connection between what happened to him and what may have happened to Maddie but decides best to wait waits until the next day to go buy a paper to get the number to call the police. However disturbed he may have been he saw no urgency in reporting, evidently.

Did he really need to buy a paper to know the number to make the call? As far as we know, 112 is the number for emergencies for Europe. Both in Portugal where he is and in Germany where he resides.

But even if he didn’t know that, all he had to do was to head down to nearest coffee shop or restaurant, they all have the nearest GNR number handy.

He sees Wojciech Krokowski for the third time on the 4th but decides to inform police only on the 5th.

13. Why a second visit to Sagres?

One question must be asked, what is Wojciech Krokowski doing in Sagres again?

He supposedly was there on the 29th, so what is he doing there on the 4th?

Sagres like Praia da Luz is a “one-hit” town. For Praia da Luz that one-hit is the beach, for Sagres it’s the fortress.

Once that is visited no need to visit it again 5 days later. It doesn’t make sense.

Both the promontory and the fortress are well worth a visit, no question about that but having only a week holiday as Wojciech Krokowski appears to have had, it’s not worth a repeat with so many beautiful things to see in the region and in the country.

As we’ll see later on Wojciech Krokowski shows interest in seeing Évora and Lisbon in a single day. Both of those he visits in 1 day but then seems to have spent 2 days of his week visiting something that is visited and well visited in just a few hours.

And Sagres is not something one visits because one is passing near by it, it’s an objective. To go there one plans to go there as it’s quite far from anything else.

It makes no sense to have been there on the 29th and then return there on the 4th.

14. Starting to put the pieces together

Let’s now focus on hard fact. Because we are encountering hard facts that need to be looked at and it’s from these that one withdraws valid conclusions.

The first and evident fact is that Nuno Lourenço photographs a vehicle that has been rented by Wojciech Krokowski. And he describes Wojciech Krokowski to perfection. Which means he simply didn’t choose a vehicle randomly. It was that one he wanted to photograph

Second fact is that the photographed car is on Praça da República, meaning that Wojciech Krokowski had been indeed in Sagres and had been in that particular town square.

The fact that Nuno Lourenço is clearly inventing a story doesn’t invalidate that he’s using a real car rented by a real and traceable person who he’s not supposed to know from anywhere.

The three facts above show that he’s clearly directing PJ in Wojciech Krokowski’s direction. Specifically in that particular tourist’s direction.

Nuno Lourenço’s plot although absurd in the telling is very objective and quite linear. One just has to not be distracted by the absurdity he has glued on it.

Nuno Lourenço’s plot starts with him being suspicious about Wojciech Krokowski before Maddie disappears. The reason for that is that for him it has to be so.

To be suspicious only after Maddie disappeared would empty out Wojciech Krokowski role in the plot because then, supposedly, Maddie’s abductor should have his abducting appetite quenched and not draw upon himself any more of “abductive” attention.

The supposed interaction between them on the 29th is to create the idea that Nuno Lourenço suspects Wojciech Krokowski to be a potential abductor. It’s the opening act.

To link Wojciech Krokowski to Maddie, which is an absolute necessity, the suspicions must befall on him prior the little girl disappearing.

Wojciech Krokowski again enters the plot in Sagres when Nuno Lourenço needs an excuse to call authorities after Maddie has disappeared.

To link the need to call authorities and link Wojciech Krokowski can only be done after Maddie has gone, otherwise there would be no link between him and the little girl.

Calling the authorities, could only have been done on the 4th but is only done on the following day for a reason.

Maddie disappears on the night of the 3rd, Wojciech Krokowski has to leave Portugal early on the 5th and as he’s staying in Burgau and flying out in Faro so the only day to link him to Nuno Lourenço is the 4th. Reason why Wojciech Krokowski is in Sagres that day.

But to put PJ really on Wojciech Krokowski’s heels Nuno Lourenço must call the authorities only on the 5th. He has to allow Wojciech Krokowski time to fly out of the country before warning PJ.

If he called PJ on the 4th, the police would quickly track the man down, talk to him and find out he had nothing to reveal and abandon there and then any and all investigation concerning the man. The false lead would not even survive a day.

We have written before that immediately after Maddie’s disappearance there followed a critical period when it was absolutely required to keep PJ distracted with false leads under the penalty they could focus their investigation on where they shouldn’t, which would be on Praia da Luz and on the people holidaying there in the off-season.

Once Wojciech Krokowski flew out of the country he would become a false lead that would continue to be followed.

Long-distance investigations always involve a degree of bureaucracy and time wasted doing it and he would have left the country just before he was to be considered a person of interest to the case.

There had to be a reason to call authorities and that could only be arranged on the 4th and authorities could only be called on the 5th after he left, as they were.

The fact that Wojciech Krokowski was used as a false lead means that he accepted to be one. The fact that the rented car is photographed in the Praça da República shows that very clearly. He placed himself in Sagres so that Nuno Lourenço could point the finger at him.

He has nothing to fear. They can ask him any and all questions about the case and he knows – because it’s true – that he has nothing to do with Maddie, he has nothing he can help the authorities with.

The longer they are busy with him the more PJ wastes time and is distracted.

However, and that’s Wojciech Krokowski’s usefulness, he can report back exactly what diligences the police have taken with the investigation where he’s concerned.

Wojciech Krokowski is a false lead that can provide feedback on how PJ is literally being entertained by following him.

But, one may ask, and one should, if all was as we say it was then how could the rented car have been photographed on the 29th in the Praça da República?

In our opinion it wasn’t.

In our opinion It was photographed on the 4th, explaining Nuno Lourenço’s insistence to show when the photograph was taken: “this time he was able to take a photo of the vehicle, which he supplied to the police and that he exhibits now, insisting [fazendo questão] in showing the time, 18H08 of 29/04/2007 as registered on the phone”

Why does he insist in showing this particular data about his picture of the car but then there’s no mention of him wanting to show all the others ones he supposedly took and were botched by his finger in front of the lens?

We think that it would be useful for the police to see them. To see how many pictures he defiantly took of Wojciech Krokowski or if police experts could extract some information from them. And he could prove how really clumsy he had been at that crucial moment as the botched up pictures would speak for themselves.

Oh, he must have deleted them just like he threw away the paper with the licence plate. That would be very convenient. We’ll pretend (NOT) we will believe that.

Nuno Lourenço, although botching up his lines of the script – reminding us so much of Stephen Carpenter in that aspect – achieves – unlike Stephen Carpenter – fully the objectives intended: he sends PJ after Wojciech Krokowski and PJ does go after him.

15. The Burgau connection

Some say that Nuno Lourenço’s statement has a profound effect on the PJ. Said like that it leads one to believe that PJ valued this lead more than any other when that clearly was not the case.

There is more in the files about this lead than about others leads because this one has one thing the others don’t: it has the licence plate which is palpable, it can be followed up.

And that’s what PJ does. It does what it should have done, if follows a lead that can be followed. The Wojciech Krokowski lead has the exact same value as any other.

It led to more information? Yes, it did. Why? Because it could be followed. That simple. No other conclusion should in our opinion be taken from it.

And because it could and was followed, it led PJ to go up to the next level in this false lead: Burgau.

The licence plate led to a name, the name to an apartment in Burgau. From the apartment to a bar, the “Beach Bar” also in Burgau and from that bar to FNAC Chiado in Lisbon to close the circle.

Burgau shows very clearly a network of people involved in propagating this false lead.

This is where the FNAC lead is implanted. Continuing to send PJ after a real palpable person and so keep it entertained.

The FNAC lead provides PJ with a CCTV image of Wojciech Krokowski.

With the CCTV image it is confirmed that Nuno Lourenço has described Wojciech Krokowski correctly, thus proving he was speaking the truth about a man he supposedly had never seen before. With that CCTV image and Nuno Lourenço’s description Wojciech Krokowski evolves from being a possible person of interest to a real person of interest, bordering being a suspect.

And if Nuno Lourenço decribes the person who rented that car he photographed so accurately then the supposed abduction attempts were also accurately described. That CCTV image makes the Wojciech Krokowski threat to be a real thing.

But to put this image in PJ’s hands, one had to direct PJ to Lisbon, more precisely to the Chiado mall where there’s a FNAC. How is it known that this image even exists? Because Wojciech Krokowski knows he had been there and knows he bought 2 CDs there.

It’s common knowledge that security videos are stored for a week at least. The fact that Wojciech Krokowski knew he had been there and that he paid for the 2 CDs with a credit card makes it possible to makes this CCTV end up in PJ’s hands: all that is required was to have him pay the rental car with that same credit card he used in FNAC.

When those payments were matched and the time of payment in FNAC determined, then most certainly there would be a video footage of him there that could be found. And so it was.

Probably PJ would get to this image by itself by running an analysis on what other payments had been made by that credit card during that period in the country but just like Smithman had to force contact with the Smiths, so did the tellers of this tale have to do the same with the Chiado FNAC. They had to make sure PJ went to that particular FNAC store.

Enter the scene the owner of the “Beach Bar” in Burgau where the apartment where Wojciech Krokowski stayed with his wife is.

It’s not an employee that speaks to the PJ, it’s the owner of the bar. The files say proprietário (owner) and not gerente (manager) or empregado (worker/employee). That is very important which can be seen later on.

We don’t know when the conversation between the bar owner and Wojciech Krokowski took place. We have read and heard it referenced that CCTV video or images of Wojciech Krokowski there were given to the PJ. We have no knowledge of such CCTV footage/images.

As far as we know, in the files there are only the following CCTV images:

- the Paraíso bar pictures where the T9 appear on the afternoon of the 3rd;

- a couple on a gas station with a girl, proven not to be Wojciech Krokowski and wife as some have speculated;

- Wojciech Krokowskiand wife coming out of FNAC Chiado (Lisbon).

We know of this conversation from a report of an external diligence done on May 5 by Inspectors Davide (?) Gomes and Hugo Ferreira of PJ.

In it the bar owner speaks of a very convenient football tale, in our opinion to confirm that Wojciech Krokowski is indeed Polish and to show the police that they were on the right track.

In that conversation what we would like to call the reader’s attention to is how the owner comes up with this most amazing question that Wojciech Krokowski supposedly asked him: where could he buy Portuguese music CDs in… Portugal?

Maybe in the same kind of places he can buy CDs of Polish music in Poland we would say.

But guess where the owner tells him he can do that, where he can buy such a rarity which is to find a Portuguese music in Portugal?

The bar owner says he told Wojciech Krokowski that he had 2 options. One was in a shopping mall in Albufeira – which according to Google Maps is 83 kms away (why not recommend Lagos?) – or in Lisbon more specifically the in the FNAC shop of the Chiado mall (which is 329 Kms away).

There were other FNAC shops in Lisbon, currently there are 8: FNAC Aeroporto de Lisboa, FNAC Amoreiras, FNAC Chiado, FNAC Colombo, FNAC Vasco da Gama, FNAC Alfragide, FNAC Almada (a mall which is very visible and easily accessed by anyone entering Lisbon from the South by car by the 25 de Abril bridge) and FNAC Oeiras.

Isn’t that just telling the PJ, “if you look there, in the FNAC at Chiado, you’ll be pleasantly surprised, trust me, wink, wink, nudge, nudge, hey?”

Imagine the reader is a foreign tourist sitting in Torquay on holiday and asks a owner of a pub where one could buy a CD of English music and is told to travel all the way to London, and specifically to Piccadilly Circus to do that!

Putting that CCTV image in PJ’s hands completes the plot to create and maintain a false lead which is needed to keep PJ entertained:

- Wojciech Krokowski knows he was in FNAC Chiado on the 2nd and he bought 2 CDs there with a credit card;

- It’s easily deduced that there must be a CCTV image of the couple there;

- It’s known that Wojciech Krokowski will leave Portugal on the 5th.

All that is left to be found is a volunteer to send PJ up this creek.

Nuno Lourenço is chosen. He supposedly is not in Praia da Luz and he has a daughter the same age as Maddie.

Wojciech Krokowski parks the car in Praça da República on the 4th and Nuno Lourenço photographs it. The cellphone data is manipulated so photo is registered as taken on the 29th.

That done, all left to do is to call authorities once Wojciech Krokowski’s plane takes off.

PJ would then be sent running in circles around Wojciech Krokowski, going to Sagres, Burgau, Germany and Poland and stay well away from Luz.

All would lead to nothing but that was the whole idea. Very simple and effective, time wasted, attention diverted and no one would know better. All would in the end be summed up to an exaggerated reaction by a Portuguese emigrant on holiday against a tourist innocently photographing because of the hysteria that arose from Maddie’s disappearance.

No one would know better.

But there is one person pivotal and shows that there is a network behind this story: the bar owner.

He is the one who provides the independent validation to Nuno Lourenço’s otherwise absurd tale. He is the one that makes the pieces of the story to come together so making it very clear it was all a collective effort.

The bar owner, we repeat not employee, who nudged PJ into finding the FNAC Chiado CCTV image we believe was Ralph Eveleigh, Robert Murat’s uncle.

If not him then it would be someone close to him as the Eveleighs owned that bar at one time. It’s possible the person who spoke to police may have been renting from Ralph Eveleigh and be referred to as proprietário (owner) because although a rentor he would effectively be the owner of the business using the rented space.

Virginia Blackburn's Daily Express article of November 26 2007 “'Madeleine's gone!' shrieked Kate. What really happened on the night a little girl disappeared” seems to say that it is indeed Ralph Eveleigh who owns the bar at the time: “Murat's uncle ran a bar in nearby Burgau: that, too, was searched”.

We suggest that Nuno Lourenço and Wojciech Krokowski are part of – or connected to – that circle of people who were there enjoying off-season holidays with a very specific reason, one they did all for it not to be known.

That group of people who directly or indirectly obstructed justice and have ultimately destroyed Mr Amaral’s life for the last 8 and half years, time he will never be able to get back.

If one includes in this group as one should Everleigh, Yvonne Martin and the Alvor couple, one can easily see that the obfuscating was not circumscribed geographically only to Praia da Luz.

Why so many involved? No one could have then predicted the proportions things would take. With the backing of the powerful choosing to tell a “harmless” lie (harmless in the sense that the parents of the victim were also in on it so no one was being harmed) instead of risking having their reputation ruined with the truth seems to be the natural thing to have done.

Also, no one predicted that PJ Files would be made public and that they would be subject to such passionate scrutiny. 

It must be horrible to live in permanent fear, permanent defensive mode, always looking over one’s shoulder and all because of a “harmless” mistake.  

16. The Mirror article

The Mirror article recovers Wojciech Krokowski out of nowhere.

For us there can only be one reason for that to happen: to show that the swinging is now in the crosshairs of whoever is deciding in the Maddie case.

Like Euclides Monteiro served to expose the body route and so warning all those involved in it that their a heads were about to roll, Wojciech Krokowski now serves to say that things are now heading outside the T9.

And by using Wojciech Krokowski, someone who has no connections to the Ocean Club, Mark Warner or Praia da Luz, it’s saying that this “outside T9” is really outside. As in guests as well. As in the full truth.

Mr Amaral is clear in his book that PJ went around Luz questioning about Wojciech Krokowski (pg 72): “we’re left with proceeding with the reconstitution of the steps of the Polish couple while they enjoyed holidays in the Algarve, we want to know if they were seen in Praia da Luz, if they could be related with Maddie’s disappearance. The couple’s photo, meanwhile taken from a Lisbon mall surveillance system, where they went on May 2, is shown to various witnesses, in restaurants of Praia da Luz, in which Tapas and Millenium restaurants are included, no one recognises them”

Wojciech Krokowski and his wife weren’t seen setting foot in Praia da Luz. If they did, they did like we did, they just passed through the town.

Knowing that, the following passages of said article are for us very interesting:

“But Mr Krokowski, who describes himself as an “obsessive photographer” told us he still had every single picture he took the day Madeleine vanished and handed them over so we could pass them to Operation Grange.


Speaking about the photos from his holiday in 2007, Mr Krokowski said he was happy to hand them over.

He added: “We are not the type of people to lie on the beach so we travelled a lot in that area between Sagres and Burgau and I have plenty of photos from our time there but the police never asked for them.

“I thought once maybe I should show those photos. They are not just ¬landscapes, there are lots of people. Maybe something in there could be helpful.

“I collect all my photographs, I still have them from that trip, of course you can have them if they could help in anyway.””

There are only so many pictures one can take of the Praia da Luz beach. We were there so we know that for a fact.

Let us just highlight the following fom the quotes above:  

“he still had every single picture he took”

“was happy to hand them over”

“we travelled a lot in that area between Sagres and Burgau and I have plenty of photos from our time there”

“they are not just ¬landscapes, there are lots of people. Maybe something in there could be helpful”

But what we really, REALLY want to highlight are the following 2 paragraphs of the article:

“Officers are scouring ­dozens of images from the camera of businessman Wojciech Krokowski, from Poland.

They are focusing on those he took while in Praia da Luz around the time Madeleine went missing – on May 3, 2007.”

So he was in Praia da Luz after all. And if the pictures he supposedly took there were only of the beach and its scenery would they be the focus of anything?

Could the message be any clearer? We don’t think so.

It’s clear, very clear that the intention is to finally burst the bubble.

17. Conclusion

Are we optimistic?

We never, ever put aside the archival hypothesis. We think it’s a foolish option to take and have said so repeatedly but we are fully aware that the foe has proven all these years that it will not give up easily.

The wider circle, the one that really matters, the one that is sustaining – not deciding – the whole edifice of this hoax has finally been told that it is time for them step on the stage and face the lights. And that it’s time for them to face the public’s reaction.

The Met has been told to send the clear message that the time to play cops is over. No more binder paper carrying in the cobbled streets of the Algarve for the cameras. They “are now following a small number of focused lines of inquiry” and we get to know that the “enquiry has not reached a conclusion, there are still focused lines of investigation to be pursued.”

And the lines are not only focused but that they “still have very definite lines to pursue which is why we are keeping a dedicated team of officers working on the case.”

Or in other words, it’s time for the Met to close shop and to start coming to conclusions.

And it’s not forgotten to remind all that “Operation Grange is working to support the Portuguese investigation and this work continues” and that “the Portuguese police remain the lead investigators and our team will continue to support their inquiry. They have extended every courtesy to Operation Grange and we maintain a close working relationship. I know they remain fully committed to investigating Madeleine's disappearance with support from the Metropolitan Police”

Meanwhile, the linking the word “fraud” to the McCann fund in the public’s mind seems to be going very well.

We see no reason to be other than optimistic. 


  1. Having read your analysis then yes, seems very likely & logical that Krokowski and Lourenco acted as Carpenter did to obfuscate... I find your words poignant and thought -provoking, especially the following:

    "That group of people who directly or indirectly obstructed justice and have ultimately destroyed Mr Amaral’s life for the last 8 and half years, time he will never be able to get back."

    Thanks yet again for a very informative and well-researched post which helps shine a light on matters

  2. Hi Textusa,well done on providing valuable infomation on Nuno Lourenco, but alas no wife statement to confirm his factual statements from the Portugal PJ?
    Operation (Whitewash)Grange has provided clutter details to the UK public as to their "Investigation" of over 14000 days produced no new leads and have scaled the Operation down to Five Detectives from 38,so if you have not traced any perpetrators of crime in 4.5 years with 38 full time officers,how long will it take with Five full time Officers?
    Sir Bernard Hogan Howe, has kept a low profile since his "fraudian slip" of the possibly demise of Madeleine McCann on a live radio broadcast to the UK public?
    BHH, has left explanations of scaling down to an Assistant Officer and has been absent from the UK with regard to appearances before select Committees on Child abuse claims in the UK?
    Sir Bernard Hogan Howe to retire shortly?
    SY have not indicated has not mentioned any investigation of "Fraud" with regard to the Find Madeleine McCann fund, yet they have so far gave no explanation of the child's whereabouts or even if Madeleine may still be alive?
    SY have at no time ever mentioned the Dogs,Eddie and Keela detection of Crime Scenes,Renault Scenic,Apartment 5a surrounding area and the rented Villa,clothing worn by individuals?
    DNA Evidence?
    Overall a simple "Maxwellisation"has taken place with regard to the SY ,Operation Grange-Abduction, to "assist the"McCann family" eh dodgy Dave, care of Rebekah Brooks and Rupert Murdochs cohorts,Brunt,Sky?
    What a shambles, whilst SCI Campbell and DCI Redwood retire to sunny climates in Jamaica after their classic creche Dad, Jane Tanner explanation Crime Watch October 2013, not shown in Portugal,wonder why it wasn't shown(farce)?

  3. Hi Textusa, very interesting article, I always thought it was a co-incidence about the bar owner being a relation of R Murat, small place I know but still...

    When you refer to 'that circle of people who were there enjoying off-season holidays with a very specific reason' you remember that in Dec 2014 OG (I think) produced a list of around seven people who were 'persons of interest with the option of being made arguido during the process'? Two of these were middle-aged English ex-pats living around Lisbon. How do you think these people fit in and fit together - are they all part of the 'circle'?

    I have never seen an explanation for why some of these English ex-pats were made POI at that point or what connection they had - do you have any ideas? This has always puzzled me...

    Don't want to publish specific names but can send on NFP if you wish.


    1. BlackCat,

      We would be grateful if you did. Thank you.

    2. BlackCat,


      Please let us digest. :)

    3. DO NOT PUBLISH BlackCat,

      We have never seen official confirmation or any other information.

      The original source of this information would be the best person to address your questions.

      We are in the same position as you - we don't know.

      But to answer your question in general terms, we think this post, if anything, with Wojciech Krokowski of Poland and Nuno Lourenço of Germany, shows things were not limited to the people of Luz and Britisch citizens.

      The circle is wide, quite wide indeed.

      Thank you for your collaboration. :)

  4. And people think acting isn't a craft, clearly it is. In the end, volume and repetition aren't plausible replacements for hard-won expertise.

  5. ..... and many people still don't believe there was any pre-planning in this sorry tale.

    It's amazing what went on pre - and post May 3rd.

    This is a very informative article. Well done.

    1. Anonymous 30 Oct 2015, 20:19:00,

      Please include us in that number of people who DO NOT believe that there was "any pre-planning in this sorry"

      Nothing we have written supports pre-planning of anything related to Maddie.

      Any pre-planning would only be related to setting up adult activities.

      There was no plan to do anything to Maddie.

  6. Is there any evidence that all the people involved, including people staying in other places such as Burgau and the ex-pats who helped out, were all involved in some way with the swinging activities, ie either making an income from it or taking part? Or were some people bribed financially into helping out after the event? Totally agree with you about the limitations of Praia da Luz as an interesting holiday destination - it is lovely to sit in the sun and drink sangria when the weather is consistently hot, as it has been when I have visited, but must be quite depressing if even a little damp and chilly.

    1. Every time I tried to book a holiday in Luz through Mark Warner holidays in April weren't available. Their product requires guaranteed good weather or snow, shivery Atlantic breezes are not conducive to sporty active beach holiday packages, and just because people say they were MW staff it doesn't make it true.

    2. When are you talking about? They have pulled out of the Ocean Club so you can't book it through Mark Warner any time of year

    3. Back when it counted.

    4. And when was that? I believe it generally opened for the season at Easter. There are certainly plenty of older tripadviser reviews from early spring, mostly saying the weather was excellent, just cold at night

  7. I can't see any evidence that Nuno Lourenço and Wojciech Krokowski were involved in anything going on in the Ocean Club. Neither of them were staying there, and Nuno Lourenço was staying more than 20km away with his mother, so how does that fit?

    If this was all supposed to be organised in the space of a day, not even that, then I think it's ridiculous

    1. All that had to be organised was the photographing of Wojciech Krokowski's car.

      Wojciech Krokowski was never on the beach photographing children, or anything else for that matter, and he'd already been to the FNAC at the Chiado mall in Lisbon. All that was needed was for someone to mention that fact to the PJ.

      So apart from the photograph of the car only two other things were needed:

      1) Someone to tell the PJ the made up the story about Wojciech Krokowski taking photos on the beach and then trying to abduct a child.
      2) Someone to mention to the PJ that Wojciech Krokowski had been to the Chiado mall in Lisbon.

      Not much to organise there.


  8. The apartment in Bargau was as low-rent and residential as they come, and the choices in the western Algarve for holiday rentals, especially off-season, are off the scale abundant. Also, the last time I was there in March/April a couple of years back it was sterling tumbleweed.

    Dr Amaral also said blood was found in the apartment, not suggesting anything foul or untoward, just wondering why?

    1. Anonymous 31 Oct 2015, 05:03:00

      Blood was found on the kitchen cupboard at Burgau. It didn't match anybody who had given samples.

      It wouldn't be unusual to find blood in a kitchen. Knives, sharp can lids.

    2. I know, just an instinct, a bad feeling pretty much the same as a nagging curiosity as to why a pig farmer with a criminal record was in the area and interviewed last December.

      In addition, Goncalo Amaral was clear Leicester were there to stifle the case, yet they summoned the dogs from the UK, how does one reconcile that contradiction? As soon as the couple returned to the UK, so did the local Midlands force.

      Harrison reckoned the investigation should be looking for a body locally, in Luz. It makes no sense to make a dramatic mass exodus if they were there to assist in a conclusion.

      Something's not right here!


    Hailey Johnson

    The exchanges reported in the Gaspar statements are:

    (options to vote)

    Joking banter

    Swingers' test

  10. Author Kurt Vonnegut is quoted as saying the following: “Write to please just one person. If you open a window and make love to the world, so to speak, your story will get pneumonia.”

    Then we read the words we have just read from Tina, then we realise we have touched:

    Last Friday, Textusa posted in her Blog, ''Praia Da Luz' about the massive hoax that was perpetrated there.

    The hoax theme has been continued in her latest Blog with more protagonists taking central stage and being shown to be aiding and abetting in this global hoax.
    A suspect bar owner, false accusations of attempted Abduction and a person who "liked to take photographs of children"

    These two Blogs from Textusa had a profound effect on me.

    A hoax!
    Indeed, one that has grown and grown like a festering cancer.

    I've always had a vivid imagination.
    When I was a little girl, I had a very frightening dream.
    One that I've never forgotten.
    It panned out like a movie, complete with titles and subtitles.
    I then wrote this story out and gave it to my teacher who praised me for my efforts.
    The story was very frightening and has stayed with me to this very day.
    I've no idea how the mind of an eleven year old conjured up something so frightening all those years ago, but I'll never forget it.

    Textusa's post brought it all back.

    My dream was called 'The Changeables'

    People you thought you could trust but couldn't
    People to whom you gave ALL your trust and whilst you were doing that , they were betraying you, laughing at you for your naïveté whilst they were morphing into a Changeable before your very eyes and you knew the trust was gone!
    It left you feeling desperate and devastated.

    In Textusa's post ( Maria Santos), she effectively strips away all the spin and shows the 'Abduction' for what it really was.
    A massive hoax!
    Our trust totally betrayed and shattered into a million pieces.
    It's patently clear that we've been lied to on a scale unprecedented from day one, but this has really gone further than that.
    It's been a global scam!
    From the parents initially lying about the 'jemmied' shutters and which door they entered and exited, the "whooshing curtains", the " tea stain", to Clarence, lying through his back teeth and telling us that Kate and Gerry are "Not responsible for Madeleine's death!", (listening and watching that clip on You Tube' still send shivers down my spine)
    The Police , allegedly destroying evidence, withholding information
    The Tapas Seven " We knew something was going to happen.... "
    The Nannies, allegedly being advised on what to say.
    Sit Bernard Hogan-Howe telling us about the dossier that was presented to them by the McCann family before stumbling over his words and informing us of Madeleine's demise before hastily trying to correct himself.
    Our stalwart , stiff lipped (Ha ha!) British Press telling us "the truth ", oh yes, the " truth" about this poor family and how they are suffering, dressing up their lies with unparalleled spin whilst coining in all the money that they have made on the back of a little girl who deserved so much more and who was so devastatingly betrayed , all so sickening to read.

    One thing all of these have in common is that they all hold positions of supposed trust.
    These are the 'Changeables' on my dream from all those years ago.

    Doctors: if you can't trust a doctor to do the very best for you who do you trust?

    A government spokesperson or a "source close to the McCanns" : surely our own British government would tell us the truth, wouldn't they?

    Nannies: in a position of trust with our children.

    The Head of the Metropolitan Police: surely?


  11. cont.

    The Press: all involved in the hoax, pointing their camera lenses to the floor to hide the fact that 'Praia Da Luz' is so tiny and that the stories about how far this place to that place was - all a lie , and PDL had little there to attract a visitor other than the glorious beach and we all know what the weather was like in that fateful week in 2007.

    The people enjoying their holiday there at that time were evidently not there for the beach holiday !

    It's almost as if my dream from all those years ago had come to fruition!
    Dreams can come true then !

    Lied to by the very people we should trust.
    Lies, lies and more lies with a single lie creating a web of more lies.
    Taking us all for fools.
    Telling us how to think, what we should think and how we should feel sorry for the very people who have perpetrated this massive, global hoax.

    The sense of betrayal, devastation and despair to be felt by so many when this hoax is finally exposed will be like no other.

    For those of us who have been following this case from the outset, we are already aware of some of these feelings, but the final exposé will be the ultimate betrayal and the destruction of trust forever.
    The 'Changeables' , alive and living amongst us !

  12. Anonymous31 Oct 2015, 10:15:00

    The dogs were sold as a tool to Mr Amaral by Mark Harrison of NPIA. The decision to summon them was made by PJ. Leics were involved as the local force where the missing person normally resided. The expertise that the UK offered, Lee Rainbow and Mark Harrison to name two were National resources. Leics played a much bigger role after the McCanns returned home.


    Sex hols on cards for British swingers
    Firm promotes partner-swapping breaks for UK couples

    A HOLIDAY firm has started selling swinging holidays for Brits.

    Desire Resorts is promoting partner-swapping breaks at its two adult-only hotels in Mexico.

    Couples can also take part in massages, tantric sex sessions and get tips from the stars of Playboy TV and Radio.

    The firm’s Mario Cruz said: “The only rule is ‘no means no’ — but other than that, we don’t get involved with what people want to do.

    “We allow threesomes and foursomes, where people sleep three or four to a room, and we allow single ladies to visit. It’s not for everyone. People raise their eyebrows.”

    Sexologist Jessica O’Reilly is offering talks at the International Swingers Month events in Cancun in January.

    She said: “The resorts are the perfect ambience to re-set as a couple. Everyone is in love.”

  14. This could be old news already for you but here it is just in case.

    Scotland Yard has dramatically reduced the number of investigators working on the MM Case!

    Could this mean "mission control" is confident (or has received reassurances) of the outcome of the Appelate Court decision on Judge Melo e Castro provisory sentence?

    They seem to be saying: "That's it folks!" No more blockbuster, investigation stunts are required to influence the course of Justice - by insinuating the incompetence of the PJ and so and so - do you follow? Mere speculation of course!

    1. Pat Brown - the well-known American criminal profiler noted it on her blog on the 28th October 2015.

      "What I believe has been going on for the last number of years is fulfilling the remit, to investigate all leads with the specific requirement that the McCanns be considered cleared and off limits to further investigation.

      Why Scotland Yard has been unable to "solve" the crime so far either means the investigators accepted the abduction theory and simply have not been able to come up with a credible suspect or the known darn well no abduction occurred but haven't come up with a suspect they feel is convincing enough to foist on the public.

      Perhaps, they were told to simply make the investigation appear thorough and allow it to dwindle away with an eventual "We believe we know what happened and who did it but we haven't been able to get enough concrete evidence to take the person to court. Since he is (fill in the blank with "dead" or "already incarcerated for life") ________, we are administrately closing the investigation."

      Full posting here:

    2. The problem with Pat is that in the past she supported views with good research even travelling to PDL to carry out more research and had very clear theories. However now the only evidence she is presenting to support her theory of whats going on in with SY is her previous knowledge of local crime enforcement in the USA, which with all due respect could not possibly be used as a template for this case........In the snippet you have provided above she has come up with 3 different theories
      1. SY accept the abduction theory
      2. SY know darn well no abduction occurred
      3. SY didn't have enough evidence to take it to court.

      Which is it

    3. I really don't see why you got so confused. I didn't get three theories. Just one overall perception.

      You may not need to read the full article as I did but, you may need to read the excerpt with an open mind, otherwise you might be prone to take things out of context and fit neatly into a "cognitive dissonance" scenario - if you know what I mean ...

  15. It has been brought to our attention that It has been suggested that our post about Sagreman was prompted by discussions about Nuno Lourenço and Wojciech Krokowski (Sagresman) on CMOMM forum, or JH Forum as is best known.

    This concerns us because it means the message of our post has not been understood, so we would like to clarify that there is only one thing about which we agree with others who have discussed this, and that is that Nuno Lourenço was lying.

    But anyone over 3 years old can see that Nuno Lourenço was lying. Understanding why he lied is a totally different thing and here we obviously didn't make our message clear enough.

    We also disagree with others for the reasoning behind recognising Nuno Lourenço was lying.

    We would not base our reasoning for a post on flawed research, we do our own research, so here we have to refer to what is considered by the CMOMM forum as the definitive research on Sagresman, and that's Richard D Hall's video Phantoms.

    We have publicly criticised that video for having mistakes but haven't before listed those mistakes publicly out of respect. But we feel we have to now in order to address the confusion by some that we might have used that research for our post.

    We didn't.

    As regards Sagresman the research for the Phantoms video has the following errors:

    1) The wrong car is attributed to Wojciech Krokowski. Wrong brand, wrong model. And uses extensively a picture of a car taken by PJ as if it was taken by Nuno Lourenço.

    2) Wojciech Krokowski is placed in the North corner of Praça da República where there’s no evidence was ever there.

    3) Mention is made of a car rented by Nuno Lourenço that he hands over at the beginning of holiday, we have never heard of that car.

    4) It is said the owner of the Beach bar hands over CCTV to PJ of Wojciech Krokowski in his bar, we have never seen such imagery.

    5) It is said the couple on CCTV at a gas station (a couple with a little girl!) is Wojciech Krokowski and his wife and they’re not.

    6) The video fails to explain how Wojciech Krokowski's car was supposedly photographed on the 29th, which is Sunday, the date many erroneously believe to be the date Maddie died (to be very clear, we don’t). If she died on the Sunday after the “last photo” was taken how could the rented car have been photographed that same afternoon within a plot involving her death?

    7) It also fails to explain why Nuno Lourenço lies. Not with what objective, but for what reason.

    This is only the Sagresman section of the Phantoms video we have talked about here, because that is the bit relevant to our latest blog post.

    The rest of the video also has many errors, especially about the Smith sighting, but we leave that for another time, as we said it's not relevant to what we are talking about now.

    Long before Nuno Lourenço was discussed on CMOMM forum we knew him to be lying. This is not a race, this not a competition, this is not about egos.

    We have come to conclusions which we keep to ourselves and only make public when we feel is the right time. The exposure of the booking sheets – which we held back for years, until the right time to reveal them – prove that.

    The research, timing and content of our Sagresman post is ours alone. We acknowledge all we have to acknowledge, have done so in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Not because of them but because of us and our peace of mind.

    We wanted to make that clear to readers of our blog, to clear up any confusion or misunderstanding.

    1. It has now been called to our attention privately that of the above, we have made a mistake: #3.

      We have said: 3) Mention is made of a car rented by Nuno Lourenço that he hands over at the beginning of holiday, we have never heard of that car.

      That car is mentioned. In Nuno Lourenço's statement "As such, on the 29th of last month, as he had handed over the car he had rented, went on foot, as it was near, to the "Mareta" beach, in Sagres, where he arrived at 15H00."

      Mea culpa. Apologies to our readers.

  16. I thought you would find this interesting from JH (not all there are against you):

    Carrry On Doctor Yesterday at 9:16 pm
    Interesting video regarding INTERNATIONAL Swingers Month, to be held in Cancun 2016.

    Quoting from the promotional video.....

    " do not have to worry about being judged...."

    So why would the promoters have to sell this point when the public are apparently so blasé towards swinging ?

    Furthermore, check out the house rules,, including;

    Due to the nature of our Resort, please respect all guests. Photos with cameras, cellphones or videotaping in public areas are STRICTLY FORBIDDEN. - See more at:

    No photography, or other video recordings permitted in public places.

    As well as an absence of photos from the fateful holiday, it seems that the OC at PdL didn't have any CCTV footage either.

    How strange.

  17. Textusa I wonder if you have any thoughts on the part of the statement "Officers have investigated more than 60 persons of interest" . Did you not as part of another post identify that one of the guests at the ocean club ( not the tapas 7) refer to 60 of us

  18. Textusa's ref my previous post I found the post I refered to it was by May 1 " the 60 of us" do the coincidenes ever end in this case

    1. Anonymous 1 Nov 2015, 17:42:00, 18:21:00,

      Yes, we noted the "coincidence" :-)

    2. You probably won't answer this but is this a hint that you good ladies have sent research/evidence to OG like some at the two McCann forums?

    3. Anonymous 1 Nov 2015, 21:08:00,

      No, we haven't.

      We haven't because all we have in our blog is either from PJ Files (which we believe they have) and open sources.

      Besides, we assume they visit us, as it would be an obvious thing to do.

    4. Thanks for answering Textusa :) I've always thought it ultimately fruitless to send or ask anything to the authorities/media in this case. I guess it is a noble thing to do though.

      Another thing I'd like mention is something you pointed out at the beginning of this post about the tone of the Mirror article. It really does read differently to other media stories we've had. The latest Express story shows this nicely, I think. It is also almost identical to a previous Express story from 2011 (but is about a different man).

      I do wonder sometimes if, like OG/UK Government, there are "hats" as you call them within the media? Or whether OG are using the media to respond in kind to the barrage of pink hued nonsense!

      I really do hope an end game is very close, though. Another shelving would be the worst case scenario for me...(this is a local case for me).

    5. I really do think it is well past the shelving stage. The statement was too aware of the need to show what the 10+ million have been spent on and they know they will be hammered if they spent that money without a realistic chance of a positive result. I don't know what with their fancy lawyers and all if they will ever be convicted but I'm certain that we will at least be presented with the true facts of the case supported by the British authorities. Not that I'm saying the pj files weren't the truth

    6. I just think the papers are playing with the uninformed in this case. Throwing in statements from the couple and devirting them away from the truth of the case in readyiness for the sensationalist headlines they know are coming. No fun if we are all expecting them


    An old article, but summarises what was going on and mentions swinging:

    "Other aspects of the emerging mindset against the McCanns seemed equally questionable.

    Several Portuguese lawyers and journalists, along with a uniformed police officer from the National Republican Guard I spoke to outside the Ocean Club apartment, told me solemnly not only that the McCanns and their friends were "swingers" who had taken their holiday together to indulge in group sex (an assertion made repeatedly by the Portuguese Press), but that "everyone knows" that its tolerance of orgies is the Mark Warner Ocean Club resort's main selling point.

    One afternoon I decided to test this proposition, approaching two holiday reps there, dressed in their red Mark Warner sweatshirts. "Er, is this a good place for swingers, then?" I asked.

    They looked at me in total bafflement. "Swingers?" one replied.

    "Look around you, sir. Most of our guests are retired, or families with children.""


    1. Hi Textusa,Only in America has an interesting article 2 November 2015 on statements from the family on operation Grange(whitewash) and the reasoning behind the statements?


    She/he should read your posts about MW records
    Insane should be on the attack about this info!

    1. Anonymous 3 Nov 2015, 13:11:00,

      It's good to see people gradually are able to bring themselves to read our lengthy and tedious posts but strange to find them developing our theories as if a new theory had been developed by them.

      It would be great to have an acknowledgement for our theories and research but if they feel they shouldn't or can't bring themselves to do that, there's not much we can do about it.

      On a positive note is that we're convincing others we are right on many things.

    Poster Portia makes a good point. K says she took tennis photo to prove she was there and not elsewhere, doing whatever she was doing.

    Christopher Stilwell cousin of Isabel, who gave (rather poor) evidence for Mcs at the damages hearing.
    Christopher had links to Oceanico, Gerry Fagan and Simon Burgess. The latter 2 have since resigned their directorships of Oceanico.

  23. Off topic - apologies - but I just find Bridget's article interesting to re-read every now and then (i.e. everything is said for a purpose):

  24. Textusa I am not asking you to print this as its not relevant to the Sagresman post. But just reading the O Donnel article again, many things stick out now:
    1. 'Praia da Luz was the nearest Mark Warner beach resort and this was the cheapest week of the year - a bargain bucket trip, for a brief lie-down.'

    So promoting the reason for all the exhausted parents congregating at OC PdL as being due to it being a bargain...cheapest week. (So why weren't all the guests the lower paid members of society... postman / milkman / car mechanics etc etc )

    2. "Our children made friends in the kiddie club and at the drop-off, we would joke about the fact that there were 10 blonde three-year-old girls in the group. They were bound to boss around the two boys."
    (As if parents joke about specific numbers e.g. 10 - parents would say
    'ah the girls will put the boys in their place or the girls outnumber the boys and will rule!" but to push the number 10 appears suspicious..

    3. "The children went sailing and swimming, played tennis and learned a dance routine for the end-of-week show. Each morning, our daughter ran ahead of us to get to the kiddie club. She was having a wonderful time. Jes signed up for tennis lessons. I read a book. He made friends. I read another book." ( tiny blonde 3 year olds going sailing on Atlantic coast in April/May?? I dont think so but you never know... 3 year old girls played tennis? Sorry it doesn't happen. Why does she pack these activities in? - it just is so unreasonable when you think about it. It makes you realise that she had to justify the kids being put into creche - to make it look like they had a fantastic time.. If she had put something more realistic i.e. the children played kiddies games in the creche every day supervised by the young nursery assistants it would have sounded such a 'selfish' holiday for the parents.

    4. "The parents would stand and chat by the pool. We talked about the children, about what we did at home. We were hopeful about a change in the weather. We eyed our children as they played. We didn't see anyone watching." (she builds up the suspense of a prowler possibility. Why did they hope for a change in weather is the children were packing all those fantastic activities in? And how lovely - all that gentle and mild small talk... what lovely mummies. Can you imagine the men parents talking such gentle chit chat? Again- over-egging a pudding.

    5. "Some of the parents were in a larger group. Most of them worked for the NHS and had met many years before in Leicestershire. " (Under no circumstances should you think that we were all part of one group!!!)

    6. "Afterwards, we sat by the pool and Gerry and Kate talked enthusiastically to the tennis coach about the following day's tournament. We watched them idly - they had a lot of time for people, they listened. Then Gerry stood up and began showing Kate his new tennis stroke. She looked at him and smiled. "You wouldn't be interested if I talked about my tennis like that," Jes said to me." (Are you listening people? We played tennis.... If you dont believe us then I can actually recall a piece of conversation which shows you that I'm not making it up!!)

    I think there's lots more in that article but I found it interesting to read it again after reading so manyof your posts over the last couple of years... I'm learning from you so thanks!!!


    Posted by portugalpress on November 03, 2015
    PJ police reveal: “We haven’t a clue who took Maddie”

    As news that manpower behind Scotland Yard’s four-year investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is to be cut back to four officers did the rounds of the world’s press last week, a source from the PJ - carrying out a parallel investigation from Porto - admitted: “We haven’t a clue what happened” to the little girl who went missing from apartment 5a at Luz Ocean Club eight publicity-jammed years ago.

    Despite all the police work - not to mention the millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money ploughed into Operation Grange launched in 2011 - police in Portugal say they are no closer to discovering the truth than they were on May 4, when Madeleine’s alleged abduction hit the headlines.

    “This is worrying,” explained the source, “because in most cases where no-one is arrested or charged, we know what happened, we just can’t prove it. But in this case, rigorously, there is no definitive idea on what happened. We don’t know a thing.”

    The source said it was “perfectly reasonable” to see Scotland Yard’s Operation Grange investigation reduced to just four police officers after so much time, as now all material available has been analysed and it is time for the “second phase” - in which Portugal will be lending its full support.

    “We have a great relationship with the Metropolitan Police,” the source confirmed. “And the PJ has never stopped worrying about this case. It is important to try and find answers.”

    What was intriguing about the statement put out by Scotland Yard last week is that British police are no longer talking about an abduction.

    The truncated investigation centres on “the disappearance” of the little girl. Sky News also refers to the case as a “disappearance”.

    Talking to Sky last week, the McCanns’ press spokesman Clarence Mitchell said his clients were buoyed by the fact that eight years on they still feel there is no evidence to suggest that their daughter “has come to any harm”.

    1. The word “rigorously” or better the expression “in this case, rigorously, there is no” is a very typical Portuguese one. Used by interviewees to say “yes, there is reason for you to ask that question but I’ll deny it”. A statement vehemently denying a fact but with a pinch of “one doth protest too much”.

      For us what has to be extracted is that it’s a Portuguese source, or there is a source.

      One must divide this article into 2 parts: what is and what will be.

      What is? It’s the abduction thesis.

      About that “We haven’t a clue what happened” and ““This is worrying,” explained the source, “because in most cases where no-one is arrested or charged, we know what happened, we just can’t prove it. But in this case, rigorously, there is no definitive idea on what happened. We don’t know a thing.”

      Or in other words, we have really tried hard to find an abductor but have found nothing. We tried really, really hard but there’s absolutely nothing to tell us an abduction took place, we just can’t prove an abduction took place. We don’t know a thing about abduction.

      They “are no closer to discovering the truth”, about abduction, “than they were on May 4, when Madeleine’s alleged abduction hit the headlines”.

      Note, “the source said it was “perfectly reasonable” to see Scotland Yard’s Operation Grange investigation reduced” as “now all material available has been analysed”

      Abduction is no more: “What was intriguing about the statement put out by Scotland Yard last week is that British police are no longer talking about an abduction. The truncated investigation centres on “the disappearance” of the little girl. Sky News also refers to the case as a “disappearance”.”

      What will be? We let each reader judge for themselves:

      “It is important to try and find answers.”

      “The PJ has never stopped worrying about this case”

      “It is time for the “second phase” - in which Portugal will be lending its full support”

      Is archival a phase or a decision? We would say the latter but that’s us.

    2. Textusa not sure what you mean by "Is archival a phase or a decision? We would say the latter but that’s us". Do you mean you think its going to be archived again

    3. Anonymous 5 Nov 2015, 12:37:00,

      It seems to us that if the outcome was archival, then it wouldn't be a called a phase. To call something a phase implies continuity, a time to execute whatever follows.

      To archive, would be a decision not a phase and the article speaks of a second phase.

    4. Than you Textusa the thought of archival would just break my heart

  26. So we have gone from 'abduction' and 'separate investigations with apparent certain conflicts between 2 police forces' to 'disappearance' and 'full cooperation across forces' with a 'second phase' commencing.
    If archiving then it would surely be better easier to persist with the 'abduction' narrative. 'Disappearance' opens up a whole new kettle of fish!
    'It is important to try and find answers' might be better replaced with 'we have tried our utmost for 8 years to find answers...' if an archival were in mind.

  27. It's almost as if there's this constant wish to keep people on their toes - keep applying pressure - keep them jittery.... up and down.. never able to relax fully


    Tony Bennett on JH has given his opinion saying where he agrees and where he disagrees with you on this post.

    1. A word to Tony Bennett. There is one thing in your post on JH Forum that we would like to clarify, because you appear to attribute a belief about the last photo that we certainly do not have:

      “Maria says that the photo was not taken on Sunday 29 April as claimed by Lourenco. She says that the date and time stamp was altered so as to give the date of 29 April to fit in with the bogus story of the alleged kidnapping at Sagres that day. I agree with all those conclusions, and would add that this reminds us, of course, to the discussion about the ‘Last Photo’ which now suggest that it could have been taken on Sunday 29 April and not Thursday 3 May as claimed.”

      We do NOT believe that this photo of Maddie was taken on Sunday 29 April.

      We do NOT believe that this photo of Maddie was taken on Thursday 3 May.

      This photo is so evidently fake that we are thinking of calling it “How-not-to-fake-a-photo-photo” instead of last photo.

      We believe that this photo is a composite of 2 photos. One taken of Maddie alone, WE DON’T KNOW WHEN, a copy of which appears in the Mockumentary. The other of Gerry with Amelie, which we believe was taken on 18 May. These 2 photos were then superimposed one over the other resulting in what is this photo.

      We also believe a third photo was used, one where Gerry has the sunglasses hanging vertically on his t-shirt. We suppose it was also taken on 18 May during the session by the pool with Gerry and Amelie.

      The lenses of the sunglasses on the composite picture is taken from this 3rd photograph. The reason being that it was the only one where the photographer didn’t appear in the reflection of the sunglasses. In the original it could have been seen that the photographer wasn’t Kate and that detail had to be removed.

      We have not changed our minds in any way about what we think of that photo as you seem to be implying in your post.

      If you would be kind enough to edit your post to make this clear it would be appreciated because we don't want readers misled.

    2. I think 18th May was the day they were away doing a photoshoot for the British Sunday papers, the one with the Punch and Judy booth, so I don't see how it could have been taken then

    3. Anonymous 6 Nov 2015, 18:17:00,

      Could you please back up your "Punch and Judy booth" statement please? That it was on the 18th?

      Thank you.

  29. I've been looking at the pictures on the PA website and Gerry is wearing the same outfit as the last photo on the 12th May:

    Is this useful?


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.