Friday, 23 October 2015

The Narrative of Negligence


It’s said and we fully agree that there’s nothing worse than a parent losing a child.

It’s so horrific that no language without exception has an adjective for it. A person who loses a parent is an orphan and one who loses a husband or wife is a widower or a widow.

He who loses a child has no word to give comfort of meaning, a word that at least would attempt to define what is indefinable, incomprehensible and absurdly unjust, a word to heed others of their pain and plight.

Nothing can be worse than this nothing-worse.

The McCanns have suffered a nothing-worse, they have lost a child.

Yet they and others have extraordinarily been able to make this nothing-worse even worse. That, by all standards, is an outstanding feat. A disgusting and a pitiful one but phenomenal.

And all including them making this nothing-worse even worse with the McCanns smiling and grinning.

We’re specifically talking about negligence, one of the two major clutters the Maddie case has, the other being paedophilia.

About paedophilia no one has very little doubt as to when and by who this clutter – even if we believe it genuine – was planted: Yvonne Martin in her statement of June 12.

She had, supposedly, sent an anonymous letter earlier but in terms of contact that the case has with paedophilia is when the British senior social worker resident in Sargaçal first gives a statement to the PJ.

After Yvonne Martin, came the Gaspars and then the empty CATS file.

Again, supposedly the Gaspars spoke in May but in terms of process their statements are only known by the PJ in October.

The paedophilia narrative in the Maddie case is quite simple and easy to follow.

Three seeds were planted and they became a forest because so much was and is the water poured on them by many a good people blinded by the want to repair somehow the viciousness that this sort of crime involves whenever it is, unfortunately, real.

The paedophilia narrative has a very clear target, David Payne.

He had lost nothing. He lost no child.

Some of us are of the opinion that something occurred between him and Kate McCann which led to the accidental death of Maddie. Whatever happened did not involve paedophile activity by anyone, either before or on the day of her death.

In our opinion, his direct involvement in the events surrounding Maddie’s death earns him being branded with the stigma.

That being true then one can even justify this branding as a sentence given by some obscure parallel justice system that overrode the legitimate one for a various number of reasons.

But the negligence narrative, unlike the paedophilia one, is not as clear.

Narrative meaning is “created by establishing that something is part of the whole and usually that something is the cause of something else…. Groups, communities, societies and cultures also preserve collections of typical narrative meanings in their myths, fairy tales, legends, histories and stories… Stories fill our lives in the way water fills the lives of fish. Stories are so all-pervasive that we practically cease to be aware of them… we develop storied accounts that give sense to the behaviour of others…” (Steve Denning)

In the McCann story, the Narrative of Neglect (NoN) has become an all-pervasive myth. Ask any person with the most limited knowledge of the case and their response is likely to be something along the lines of “Those doctors who left their children alone whilst they went out for the evening.”   Or with the addition of “when they went out drinking”.

With myths and fairy stories, it’s often impossible to establish their origins. Other times its origins become a myth themselves lost in the web of ideas and perceptions with which we form ideas about a subject.

With the NoN we all think it was us, each one of us, who came up with it.

We all think that before what was an obvious situation of negligence we came to the conclusion that there had been neglect.

Maybe if we had been given time to absorb the details of the story we would have come with it but truth is we didn’t. Others spoon-fed it to us.

Negligence, like Smithman did with the Smiths came to us and like he did with them, it forced itself on us.

Like with the Smithman who could have been seen without making any close contact with that family but decided not to run that risk and so forced that contact, so those responsible for spreading the NoN did the exact same.

They didn’t let us wait and discover for ourselves. They took no chances on that. They made NoN walk our way and go against us like the clumsiest of pedestrians on a sidewalk.

They made sure we noticed it.

The NoN has a dated source, noted by the author of “The Cracked Mirror”, written in 2009.

Chapter 12 May 4- The Performance of a Lifetime

“… nothing that followed was as astonishing as the achievements of Gerry McCann on May 4, before news management began to feature in “the narrative.”

Incredibly, at the time that Kate McCann was giving her statement to the police that afternoon, as well as being reminded of the secrecy rules, the media were already carrying the full unsupported and inaccurate McCann version in detail…… the unprompted denial, even at this ridiculously early stage, that the parents had been in any way neglectful or at fault ….. it was all done using the clan and “friends.”

By the time the police car carrying the pair pulled into Portimao police headquarters that morning, Sky had been well briefed with the parents’ story. And so had GMTV. So had BBC1 news. So had BBC2 Newsnight. So had all the important UK dailies.”

The author describes perfectly the launch of a myth, the NoN. He even tells us who launched it.

“Madeleine’s uncle Michael Wright” (he was actually Kate’s cousin by marriage to her cousin Anne Marie)

“The evidence clearly shows that Gerry McCann, far from passing on  to his circle only chaotic first impressions or mistaken interpretations of what had happened immediately after the disappearance, quite clearly hammered home certain key information for many hours after the disappearance which he intended them to pass on to the media. Madeleine’s uncle, Michael Wright, made this quite clear on the same day …”

The author then refers to an article by The Standard:

“This laziness - or misdirection - with the facts of the disappearance of the child was in stubborn contrast to the way the much less important matter of the parents’ activities was reported”.

The McCanns, said the story “were eating at  a Tapas restaurant in the Mark Warner Ocean Club complex  but had been checking on their children every 30 minutes. The restaurant is within sight of their apartment.” No vagueness there, no possible “misunderstandings” by relatives of “early panicky comments” by Gerry. Dead on.

… And then the Standard had this:

“Michael Healy [this was Michael Wright], the missing girl’s uncle, added: “There has been some negative spin put on this, with people criticising them for leaving the kids and going on the tear.” Mr Healy added, “But it’s nonsense, they were close by and were eating within sight of where the children were and checking on them. Other members of the group were checking on her as well. No one was rip roaring drunk. ””

The author then poses a most telling question about this “on the tear story” (the idiomatic expression being Irish/ Liverpool, meaning to go out on a drinking spree, tear rhyming with hair):““Negative spin” and “criticism.” How could there be any spin or criticism of the parents by Friday afternoon when these were the very people telling the world for the first time what had happened the previous night for the first time and when the pair hadn’t given their statements to the police?”

Apart from the author writing this was a pre-emptive defence of their conduct and child supervision, he draws no further inferences.

He may object to the inference we draw from Wright’s statement – that the NoN was an essential myth, without which an abduction was IMPOSSIBLE. That’s why, contrary to the author’s view, we have the strongest opinion it wasn’t a less important matter than the details of the disappearance.

The NoN has successfully established itself in the consciousness of the majority of those who have taken any interest in this story.

It has led to numerous heated debates on the distance between the Tapas bar and the restaurant, calls for the McCanns to be prosecuted for neglect, arguments about the frequency of the checks on the children, questions as to why Matt Oldfield didn’t actually enter the room when he made his fabled check at 9.30….

And how often were the checks made on May 3?


Transcript of TV interview with Sandra Felgueiras and the McCanns (video above from HideHo) and full video here from Xklamation).

SF - ...[how] he could have had the opportunity to get into the apartment if you were checking the apartment every 15 minutes?


Gerry - [reacts by raising his hand towards SF] Huh... How often did you say we were checking?

SF - 15 minutes...

Gerry - That’s not what we’ve said...

SF - No?

Gerry - ...it’s been widely reported it was about 30 minutes. Now, that’s what our checks were.”

Why did Gerry react so indignantly when asked by an interviewer about checks every 15 minutes, correcting her immediately to confirm the checks were actually every 30 minutes? Because, as we have suggested, no prospective abductor observing 15 minute intervals between checks is likely to continue with his plan.

The NoN has three main ingredients:

- The parents were not present when Maddie was taken;

- The checks of 30 minutes were the minimum needed for an abductor to act;

- The T9 thought they were acting responsibly because of their proximity to the Tapas and their checking system.

And the BIG ROUND TABLE? A mistake. Had they said the rectangular tables were put together to make room for them all, we would have been none-the-wiser about the Tapas dining myth.

Given their description of all of them, including children – 17 in total (we presume with some in high chairs next to the table), gathered around a table for the Millenium breakfast, is it possible this is what lodged in their consciousness when describing the BRT?

For a myth to take hold of the imagination, it needs the sustenance of repetition.  After Wright’s statement to the press, we have this:

On May 16 2007, GNR officer Paulo Carvalhosa da Costa (Carvalhosa misspelled as Carvaihosa in the original PJ Files) stated that on May 4 he arrived at the Ocean Club at 00.05. When asked, he said he never saw Robert Murat in all the times he visited the scene:

“He does remember, on a day he cannot recall, an individual who identified himself as Robert, saying that he was in PdL as a translator helping the PJ, phoned the Lagos post saying:

That some foreign women, who had already been questioned by the Judiciary Police had phoned him, communicating that in a apartment near them there was a child crying.”

Up to this date only Mrs Fenn has said she heard a child crying. This suggests it was her who may have been the “women” – probably a plural heard by Carvalhosa da Costa where there was none. Although she did not make an official statement until August 20 2007, when she reported hearing crying, which persisted for 75 minutes in the apartment below at 22.30 on May 1st, it’s likely that she had spoken to the police before this statement was taken.

If this was indeed Mrs Fenn, then she had phoned Robert Murat at a very early stage. Presumably, Murat had not just phoned Carvalhosa da Costa a couple of days before the 16th or the officer would have been more precise in his recall of when he spoke with Murat.

Murat’s call to Carvalhosa da Costa must, therefore, have been before May 14th and the crying call conversation must have been made by the woman to Murat on or before May 14th.

Why would Mrs Fenn phone Murat unless she already knew the family and had their phone number? Perhaps Murat has clarified this situation in his December interview with Scotland Yard officers?

We find it perfectly natural for two ex-pat families living down the road from one another in a small village like Praia da Luz to know details of each other such as phone numbers.

Mrs Fenn sustained the neglect scenario with her heart-breaking description of a child crying “Daddy, Daddy.” Having been the alleged victim of a burglary in her own apartment, it didn’t occur to her to alert the Ocean Club reception and ask them to check if a child had been left unattended, or to see if the child may have been crying in the presence of a parent or childminder.

Instead, she phones her friend Edna Glyn, after listening to the crying for half an hour! She was also surprisingly precise in her statement that this was an older child (Maddie rather than the twins) How could she possibly know the age of a child from the repetition of those words?

Kate herself, astonishingly, makes sure we know about the abandonment of the children by confirming that Maddie had asked why no-one had come when she and Sean were crying.

She doesn’t bother to seek clarification about what had happened and allegedly was obviously happy to leave the children again, after hearing this plaintive question.

Many critics of the McCanns have expressed their disbelief and disgust about this incident, wondering why on earth any mother could hear such a question and then continue to go “on the tear.”

A question that must be asked is who wouldn’t express disbelief and disgust before such a narrative? No one. And everyone did, as intended.

The road to abduction had been paved successfully with negligence cobblestones.

Nothing more desolate to a fisherman than to sit and see his bait being ignored by the fish swimming around and by it under the calm and clear waters but nothing is more rewarding to him than the rod straining and bending because schools of fish are fighting for it without mercy.

We suggest that such incriminating “evidence” was part of the narrative, necessary to sustain and reinforce the myth.  Every time “neglect” is mentioned; in blogs, tweets, comments on press articles, the narrative is strengthened and embedded.

Although we have chosen not to be seduced by this myth, we must grudgingly admire its potency and endurance. As well as providing an unassailable alibi, it also continues to source so many welcome distractions for TM. So, choose your narrative carefully when you decide where the truth lies.

But what seems to be overlooked by all is how really violent the NoN is to the parents who have lost a child.

The McCann grins and smiles in their excessive assertiveness in defending their own negligence makes us forget the most evident fact of this entire case: they are (not supposed or alleged) parents who lost a child.

They are 2 people to whom a nothing-worse has happened. They have suffered the worst possible tragedy a human can ever be inflicted with.

And yet, as we have seen, there were some who didn’t hesitate for a minute to put one other very heavy burden, the stigma of being neglectful parents, on top of the heaviest possible burden that were on the shoulders of these parents.

These people didn’t give a single thought before making these parents’ nothing-worse be much, much worse. Because they were not only neglectful but that it was that exact neglect that determined their daughter’s tragic fate.

Not only have they lost their child but they were the ones responsible for that having happened. Can it get worse than that?

It can, because much worse than all of the above, the worst of all, was to watch this man and this woman accept without any complaint their nothing-worse being made significantly worse..

And not only without a qualm but with a smile and a grin.

85 comments:

  1. You put it very clear how this narrative was planted. While reading this and thinking about the smiles and grins and acting ... as it would only have been a staged story around that terrible loss probably the parents could focus on staging and by this being distracted from their sorrow. Sometimes, distraction may be a helpful way to deal with deep mourning? For me it could partly explain how they managed to listen to all those questions and reproaches without being too emotional. If you know you are attacked for something you did not do, it's much easier to stay calm, isn't it? As long as you would be an actor acting some play (and really really concentrated at that) you need not take anything within too seriously.
    I believe remembering that the father said to journalists at the top of the stairs before the court in Portugal something like he would not have thought to still stand there after eight years. Maybe in this interview we no longer saw masks of actors in a stage play but the burden of parents, who lost a child - nothing worse to it - and the additional burden to explain all what happened to their growing twins, including this narrative put on them from some who "didn't give a single thought before making these parents’ nothing-worse be much, much worse" as you name it well and which they accepted.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Textusa,Ref; No Neglect=No Abduction?
      Crime Watch, UK October 2013,DCI Andy Redwood has moved the timing of an Abduction to Fifty plus minutes between, JT sighting 21.15 to creche Dad, Smithman 22.00 3 May 2007?
      Obviously this throws a spanner into the statements given by Tapas 9,Have at any time these 9 people told the Truth?
      The one fact that can be proved is they were all in it together, to obfuscate,manipulate to their own advantage backed by a huge consignment of Government cohorts,Why?

      Delete
  2. Thank you for that. Fascinating reading.
    Very illuminating. After reading last week's blog ''Praia Da Luz', I felt strangely sad and defeatist. It's like watching a play. A never ending play. A play with no dénouement.
    Albeit a play, staged before our very eyes with the intention to deliberately hoodwink, bemuse, and confuse our minds so that one cannot see the play for the clutter !
    Where is the satisfaction in that? None.
    Now, in your latest blog, more actors emerge and take to the stage All with specific roles to play. Yvonne Martin ( Good to see you still had unfinished business with her!) The Gaspar's Mrs Fenn
    A noticeable array of props So much clutter. Hard to differentiate between the truth and the lie. New Myths created, added to and prolonged by all the 'extras!'
    As you pointed out in your ''Praia Da Luz' blog - unvaunted support and collusion of the Media (pointing their lenses to the floor etc...), full collusion of the family, propogating the myth and giving it a life. It's almost as if the McCann's, the actors were indeed well prepared, well versed and well rehearsed in the actions they should take at such critical moments in the play.
    Hard to believe they had such a short time to get their act together! They knew their cues and were aware of their Props such as the big , round table. Everything planned, rehearsed and ready to stage. How many people have all been deceived!
    And, at the heart of all of this is a little girl. The smiles, the grins, the laughter, the fun, the jogging, all sit uneasily in the hearts and minds of decent people. How much longer for Madeleine to receive the justice she so deserves? When will they show care, remorse and that they are indeed 'human?' I fear we will be waiting a long time.

    Tina

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tina,
      You made me think of another reason it wasn't pre-planned.
      If it had all been pre-planned days before, as some think, they would have realised the BRT was a mistake.
      It was hasty, that's why RO and FP say they met RM that night and shook hands with him, why the timeline was altered, why they couldn't remember which night was quiz night, why FP said it was too windy to windsurf on Thursday - when M was said to have been sailing. Only a few examples of the contradictions in what they said.
      Re-reading their statements, they are literally unbelievable. They prevaricate, stumble, evade...

      Delete
  3. I admit that they prevaricated and their statements were elusive and incoherent..
    That's perfectly clear when one reads the statements.
    My point was that the stage was set, they knew their basic script.to enact.
    That they stumbled and became confused is apparent
    But, the stage was set.
    Someone surely must have been advising them ?
    They had a short time to get their act together.
    They had to be slick and they had to be fast.
    But someone, somewhere set the stage for them
    Maybe even pulled the strings !

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Without the media we would never have heard of Madeleine Beth McCann, and CM is no grandiose all-powerful visionary!

      Delete
  4. We haven't heard from "Insane" lately. Has he been sectioned and placed on a straight-jacket? Is he now brain dead or perhaps (far shot) just been given the post of meister of Eton? Did I hear you saying he hasn't eaten?

    ReplyDelete
  5. http://www.sott.net/article/304679-The-power-of-networking-Groups-are-better-than-individuals-at-sniffing-out-lies

    So relevant to Madeleine.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Networking is causing untold threats to people posting on CMoMM at the moment?
      Thankfully these have been reported to the Police Authorities to investigate the threats to a person's well being!

      Delete
    2. I think all that is best left to the crazies we will stick with the sane people who seek the truth

      Delete
  6. Great post Textusa, thank you :)

    Interesting to be reminded of that Sandra Felgueiras interview. One would expect that parents who had left their children alone and checked on them every thirty minutes would be pleased that an interviewer reduces that timeframe to fifteen minutes, thereby making the parents look less negligent. But no, Gerry McCann is positively indignant that SF had made him look less negligent.

    Also GM's reply to SF is interesting. I would have expected something like "no we checked every thirty minutes" but instead he says "it's been widely reported it was about thirty minutes". Well yes it had been widely reported it was about thirty minutes, so in that instance he was telling the truth. He chose to tell the truth "it's been widely reported" rather than tell a lie "we checked every thirty minutes".

    The McCanns showing us once again how much the brain fights against telling a lie, especially on camera.

    I'm a bit confused about this sentence as regards Mrs Fenn:

    Up to this date only Mrs Fenn has said she heard a child crying

    Because at that point, in May 2007, Mrs Fenn hadn't said anything about hearing a child crying.

    But then I am easily confused :)

    Nuala x

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nuala,

      True, it’s factual that Pamela Fenn only speaks to authorities about crying episode in August, over 3 months after Maddie’s disappearance.

      We have noted that extensively in the blog and that inexplicable time lapse is one of the reasons we have shown serious doubts about Pamela Fenn’s statement.

      We were the first to do so years ago and were very much alone to the point of being admonished by peers for doing so.

      From your comment one can conclude that you think Murat is lying about the phone call he speaks of and was just making that up for the negligence myth.

      If we don’t believe that there was ever any crying episode, for us, anyone making any reference to it is obviously lying.

      So, to be very clear, we don’t believe that phone call from the “women” to Murat ever existed. To us it existed as much as the one from Pamela Fenn to Edna Glyn on the same subject. It didn’t.

      This is what we think happened in order to back up the negligence story:

      - Pamela Fenn is approached by PJ on May 4 (probably even on the night of 3) and says she saw nothing;

      - Robert Murat contacts the PJ saying some women had phoned to say they heard crying. This was to back up what he believed Pamela Fenn had said, or was going to say;

      - In fact Pamela Fenn didn't say anything about it at the point, but Robert Murat, the designated patsy at that particular point in time, has no way to know that;

      - On May 10, Kate McCann plays her role and says what she was supposed to say, which was that Maddie said she'd been crying one night;

      - The idea was for PJ to react to Kate McCann’s “confession” to negligence and go back to Pamela Fenn asking her. Although she had said she saw or heard nothing suspicious on May 3, they would ask her if she could have heard Maddie crying on a night before;

      - If Pamela Fenn then confirmed Kate’s confession, the negligence would have been successfully implanted. In fact, we saw this happening months later, when Pamela Fenn did confirm Kate’s confession, and we are all witness of how many still believe negligence to the this day.

      Delete
    2. ''- On May 10, Kate McCann plays her role and says what she was supposed to say, which was that Maddie said she'd been crying one night; ''

      Kate McCann didn't speak to the police on May 10th

      Delete
    3. Anonymous 26 Oct 2015, 01:23:00,

      We stand corrected. Apologies to readers and very grateful to them (in this particular instance, you) for keeping us on our toes.

      But sometimes the most evident details are the ones that one fails to check and should.

      Kate in her statement on Sept 6: "When asked about the fact her daughter had been crying on the night of the Tuesday for one hour and 15 minutes, between 10:30 and 11:45, she says it is not true. She says that on that night, after midnight, Madeleine went to their room and said that her sister Amelie was crying, and sleep with her and Gerry in their room. She says that before Madeleine appeared in their room, she had already heard Amelie crying, however she did not go to the room, as Madeleine went to the room almost at the same time she head the crying. She does not remember if afterwards she or Gerry went to the childrens' room, however she states that Amelie cried for a short time" and "Regarding this night she says that none of the children cried, she would have noticed as she was in the room. Regarding the fact that Madeleine on the next morning, Thursday, during breakfast said to both of them that she had been crying and that nobody had come to her room, she presumes that this crying must have been before she and Gerry returned to the apartment. When she asked Madeleine about this however, the child gave no importance to the matter."
      http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/KATE-MCCANN_ARGUIDO.htm

      So in terms of files, it was Pamela Fenn first and Kate McCann who followed with the "crying episode".

      But what we wanted to point out is that Carvalhosa da Costa's statement show that Robert Murat was aware of the "crying eprisode", and spoke of it on or before May 14.

      Delete
    4. ''- Robert Murat contacts the PJ saying some women had phoned to say they heard crying. This was to back up what he believed Pamela Fenn had said, or was going to say;''

      There is no indication of that. He said some women, who had already been interviewed, rang him to say there was a child crying. Not that they had heard a child crying, at some point in the past, but that there was - present tense - a child crying

      ''That some foreign women, who had already been interviewed by the police, had phoned him, telling him that there was a child crying in an apartment near to them.''

      This has nothing to do with any ''crying episode'' reported by Mrs Fenn, and it's not clear why you are trying to present it as such.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous 26 Oct 2015, 10:00:00,

      It's self-evident that Carvalhosa da Costa would only refer to what Robert Murat said if it he thought had relevance to the Maddie case.

      Delete
    6. ''It's self-evident that Carvalhosa da Costa would only refer to what Robert Murat said if it he thought had relevance to the Maddie case.''

      Of course it's relevant to the case.
      What it's not relevant to is the report made by Mrs Fenn, or the claims made by the McCann's concerning Madeleine crying.

      It's perfectly clear that Robert Murat contacted the police because some women had phoned him to say they could hear a child crying nearby.

      It has nothing to do with Mrs Fenn, and I don't understand why you are trying to create the impression that it does

      Delete
    7. Insane,

      "I don't understand why you are trying to create the impression that it does"

      We know you do. And we know why we have to say you don't. Aren't you behind on your homework?

      Delete
    8. ''But sometimes the most evident details are the ones that one fails to check and should.''

      ''So in terms of files, it was Pamela Fenn first and Kate McCann who followed with the "crying episode".''

      I think you should certainly check yours
      Kate McCann told the PJ about the crying on May 4th, in her first statement. So it was her first and not Pamela Fenn


      Delete
    9. Anonymous 26 Oct 2015, 10:26:00,

      On her May 4 statement Kate says:

      "She reports only one episode where, on the morning of Thursday May 3rd, Madeleine asked the interviewee why she had not come to look in the bedroom when the twins were crying. The interviewee states that she had heard nothing and had therefore not gone into the bedroom. She thought her daughter's comment strange because it was the first time she had talked about it."

      Which means our response to Nuala was spot on. Thank you for showing there was no need for corrections.

      Delete
    10. "But what we wanted to point out is that Carvalhosa da Costa's statement show that Robert Murat was aware of the "crying eprisode", and spoke of it on or before May 14.''

      Robert Murat is not referring to the ''Mrs Fenn'' crying episode, or the ''Why didn't you come?'' crying episode.
      He reported to the police a call he had taken from some women who phoned him to say they could hear a child crying.

      Delete
    11. In your reply to Nuala you said
      ''- On May 10, Kate McCann plays her role and says what she was supposed to say, which was that Maddie said she'd been crying one night;''

      There was no statement of 10th May, so the correction was certainly required

      Now back to the point

      Robert Murat contacted the police to tell them that he had a call from some women who could hear a child crying.

      For a long time, you have claimed that this call came from Mrs Fenn. It clearly didn't

      You are still claiming the call relates to what you refer as ''the crying episode'' as reported by Mrs Fenn

      It clearly doesn't. It's a contemporaneous report of a child crying in the days that followed the disappearance of Madeleine.

      Do you now accept this, and that the caller was not Mrs Fenn?

      Delete
    12. Insane,

      No, we stand by what we said.

      Readers can now read what we have said, look at what you did and make up their minds.

      Delete
    13. Brief summary Express article summary 18.8.07. Info given by friend of Fenn
      Fenn due to give statement to PJ on Monday (20th)
      British sniffer dog searched Fenn apartment and she spoke to police, about her burglary it seems. And crying incident 2 nights before. When she heard call of dad.
      Says" she told officer what she knew"
      " She( it follows after Carole so makes it seem she is person referred to, but I think it means Fenn)
      "She revealed vital details of the movements of M's parents, K and G and their holiday friends, in the RUN UP to the night of May 3.."
      Same article quotes Portuguese police source claiming Fenn and niece had already been interviewed
      " We have already spoken to them but they will be re-interviewed because of new evidence we have."
      Pilditch, the journalist was more reliable than most.
      So press had details of Fenn, burglary, crying and what Carole saw BEFORE Fenn made a statement.

      Delete
    14. Fenn burglar - no signs of break in so had a key. So why exit through a window and risk death at that height.
      Better to just push past an old lady
      She was going to push him out - and presumably kill him?!
      None of this makes sense.

      Delete
    15. Insane saying the crying report to RM was after M disappeared. Does he mean after M went, a woman reported hearing a child cry? Why would that be relevant, unless she thought it was M crying and being held locally?
      In that case, she would phone PJ and say where the crying was coming from, or RM would have told her to do this. The officer RM spoke to would have asked him when the woman rang and where she could hear a crying child.
      But crying children wouldn't be unusual as there were so many of them in PdL at the time.

      Delete
    16. '' Why would that be relevant, unless she thought it was M crying and being held locally?''

      That is precisely the point.

      ''In that case, she would phone PJ and say where the crying was coming from, or RM would have told her to do this.''

      As she was foreign, her lack of ability to speak Portuguese may explain why the rang Murat, and not the PJ

      ''The officer RM spoke to would have asked him when the woman rang and where she could hear a crying child.''

      And how do you know he didn't?

      ''But crying children wouldn't be unusual as there were so many of them in PdL at the time''

      Indeed. So the likelihood was it wasn't relevant, but they reported it because everyone was being vigilant.

      The point is, there is absolutely no indication whatsoever that this incident relates to Mrs Fenn, or the ''Why didn't you come when we cried?'' incident.

      It's just some women, probably guests, reporting to the police that they can hear a child crying, but going through Murat because they don't speak the lingo.


      Delete
    17. If RM was contacted by a woman other than Fenn about crying incident, why no mention of this in his police interviews? I don't think he mentioned anything after this call to the police officer in May.
      If there was another woman, why did she never come forward?
      Wouldn't RM be asked about this call and who the woman was ?
      The only thing that makes sense is that he was referring to Fenn.

      Delete
    18. Why would he be asked? He passed on a message, that's all.
      The ''other woman'' had already been interviewed.
      Why would he be asked about it, if it came to nothing?

      The most likely scenario is that someone checked, the crying child was identified, not madeleine, end of story

      It makes no sense that he was referring to Mrs Fenn because she had yet to give her statement, the reference was to women in the plural and events AFTER Madeleine disappeared

      I already explained this but it wasn't published

      Delete
    19. So readers may know. This is the comment we did not publish from Insane:

      "Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "The Narrative of Negligence":

      ''He does remember however, that on a day he cannot recall, an individual who identified himself as Robert, saying that he was in P da L as a translator helping the PJ, phoned the Lagos post saying:

      That some foreign women, who had already been interviewed by the police, had phoned him, telling him that there was a child crying in an apartment near to them''

      Women, plural, already been interviewed = Not Mrs Fen
      Child crying, contemporaneous report, sometime after Madeleine's disappearance and 16th May = Not Mrs Fenn, not Madeleine

      To ''stand by what you said'' is to ignore the facts

      Posted by Anonymous to Textusa at 26 Oct 2015, 11:19:00"

      We did not publish this because this doesn't add anything and wanted to stop this "Insanity". It's a fact that Carvalhosa da Costa does not say that Robert Murat told him "Mrs Fenn called me".

      So he will hang on to this fact until hell freezes over. He has to do so.

      All people who lied did it assured that their lies wouldn't come back to them. That it was safe and perfectly alright to do so.

      We understand his predicament.

      Delete
    20. Just who are you suggesting has lied in this scenario?

      Delete
    21. Anonymous 26 Oct 2015, 13:25:00,

      We ask each reader, you included, to make their own judgements of our words.

      Delete
    22. Insane - saying women went to RM because they didn't speak Portuguese- pathetic! Is he a clearing house for reporting crime in PdL? RM was drawing attention to the crying. If it was reported and had been found irrelevant, he would have known by then. Presumably he would have kept in touch with the woman if she needed a translator? At least would know who they were instead of saying "some women".

      Delete
    23. Anon at 15.48

      He was acting as a translator for the police, both in taking witness statements and door-to-door. It is therefore perfectly logical that a foreign visitor would ask for his help to make a report to the police.
      Why would he have known about the crying? How is he "drawing attention to it". He was passing on a concern to the appropriate authorities.
      I dare say he did know their names - this isn't from his statement, it's the statement given by a GNR officer.
      I think the officer would have included the names if he felt it was relevant, don't you? Or are you suggesting he was in some way negligent? A very typical McCann response.

      Delete
    24. Insane @ 16:53
      "It is therefore perfectly logical that a foreign visitor would ask for his help to make a report to the police"
      Where did the foreign visitors get his number? He says they call him: "That some foreign women, who had already been questioned by the Judiciary Police had phoned him, communicating that in a apartment near them there was a child crying.”
      And why would RM call the GNR post about a crying child if it wasn't about M?

      Delete
    25. Censored comment from Insane:

      Not Textusa has left a new comment on your post "The Narrative of Negligence":

      Anon 17.38

      (censored)
      A visitor would get his number because he gave it to them - we already know he gave his number to some of the McCann group
      They called because they heard crying and there was a missing child who everyone except her parents were trying to find.
      How would they or Robert Murat know who was crying? That's why the women called him and he called the police - so they could check it out, presumably.

      (censored)

      Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 26 Oct 2015, 19:31:00"

      Delete
    26. Summing up. The Murat/Carvalhosa da Costa incident according to Insane:

      RM: Good Morning/Afternoon, my name is Robert Murat and I’m doing/did translating to help the police in the Maddie case. I’m calling to report something that might be important to the case.
      GNR: Good Morning/Afternoon, please sir, do go ahead.
      RM: Some women called to say they heard a child cry near the apartment they’re staying.
      GNR: Where is their address?
      RM: I don’t know.
      GNR: Okay… what are there names?
      RM: I don’t know.
      GNR: Well, that doesn’t help much… how is this related to Maddie? What made you think this would be relevant to the case?
      RM: I don’t know. Some women called saying some child was crying somewhere in Luz. I just thought you should know.
      GNR: Yes, that makes total sense. Thank you for calling.

      Or

      RM: Good Morning/Afternoon, my name is Robert Murat and I’m doing/did translating to help the police in the Maddie case. I’m calling to report something that might be important to the case.
      GNR: (yawns) Yeah? Well, if you must, go ahead.
      RM: Some women called to say they heard a child cry near the apartment they’re staying.
      GNR: Where is their address?
      RM: They’re staying in Rua XXXX, Apartment BB
      GNR: Huh, huh (pretends he’s writing it down)… And what are their names?
      RM: One is Mrs TTTTT and the other Mrs RRRRR
      GNR: Huh, huh (continues to pretend he’s writing it down)… thank you… anything else?
      RM: The child was crying in the apartment next to them, Apartment CC.
      GNR: Hmmm, yes… that might be useful… let me write that down… (thinks to himself… yeah, as if). Anything else, sir?
      RM: No, that would be all, I think.
      GNR: A good morning/afternoon to you then, sir. (Hangs up) …Ok, let’s continue to watch the game.

      Delete
    27. That's an extremely racist post, which I would expect to see on a pro forum. Why are you portraying the Portuguese police as stupid or disinterested?

      Delete
    28. Insane 27 Oct 2015, 17:23:00,

      Yes, it is.

      But it's the only 2 possibilities according to you (both, according to us, ridiculous... and one, as you say, offensive).

      About expecting to see it in a pro forum, by all means feel free to take it over to your blog.

      Delete
    29. Some observations re Insane's logic

      Women had already been interviewed by police
      If unrelated to crying, presumably without assistance from RM, so why not report the second crying incident to them directly?
      In this scenario, their initial report and crying incident were 2 separate matters.
      Or did RM mean they had phoned him, ALREADY having his phone number, to tell him about the crying (why did he give it to them?) and he had contacted the police? In which case it was one matter and he was reminding the officer of an incident already reported via himself as interpreter.

      In first scenario, they didn't need an interpreter
      In second, why was he reminding officer of an incident already reported?

      Delete
    30. The woman must have had RMs number before she heard the crying incident. Then she phones RM because she can't speak Portuguese, according to Insane. How coincidental that a woman who already has his number heard this! Was he handing his personal number to the villagers, saying - Call me first if you have anything to report and you don't speak Portuguese? If he was, that's quite out of the ordinary. Would the Portuguese accept this? What do these villagers normally do if they want to report a crime or an incident? Isn't there an expectation somebody will be able to deal with the call in English?
      GA makes no reference to ruling out a crying incident reported by anybody else. I'm sure he would have done so if the incident had been investigated and ruled out, as it would demonstrate the PJ had eliminated the possibility she was being held locally.
      The Mcs, who had the files translated, don't seem to have picked this up as something to be investigated. Considering the doubts about RM expressed in K's book, one might have expected them to ask about who heard crying, when and where, as it may have been a vital clue as to M being held locally.
      RM doesn't mention this episode in his statements.

      Delete
  7. Of course there was no neglect. The neglect myth is just as ridiculous as the 'accident' myth as well as the 'alive and well until the 3d of May' myth. They had days to plan and get it together. But even though you plan something, unexpected things can 'interfere' and very easy the plans have to change, or modify. What many see as hasty arrangements, may look hasty for a reason but does not necessarily mean 'it all happened' within a few hours.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Madeleine McCann detectives examine former suspect's pictures of children after Sunday People probe

    Wojciech Krokowski's flat was searched after the three-year-old vanished but he was ruled out and has now given us snaps he took the day she went missing


    Detectives searching for Madeleine McCann are examining pictures taken by a businessman after he told Sunday People investigators he enjoyed taking snaps of children on holiday.

    Officers are scouring ¬hundreds of images from the camera of Wojciech Krokowski, from Poland.

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

    Krokowski’s flat was searched after the three-year-old vanished. Portuguese cops later ruled him out.

    There was renewed interest in him after the release in September 2007 of an artist’s ¬impression of a man walking with a sleeping child.

    It was publicised widely in the hope it would jog ¬memories about Madeleine.

    The images British ¬detectives are looking at is in a batch of more than 100 handed over to us by the Pole during an interview.

    Among them is a ¬picture of Mr Krokowski, 52, taken in Portugal in May 2007.

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

    He said he was amazed he had not been contacted since police reopened the case in 2011. The Pole insisted: I am ready to speak to them any time they want.”

    Mr Krokowski said he ¬wanted to ¬remove a shadow that has been hanging over him since he -became the ¬subject of an international manhunt over Madeleine.

    It is the latest twist in the long-running saga in which British police have vowed to leave no stone unturned to solve the mystery of what ¬happened to Madeleine.

    The extensive Scotland Yard review, which began in 2011, has so far cost more than £10million, with an extra £2million set for next year.

    Mr Krokowski and his wife Anetta, 50, stayed in the Solimar apartments in Burgau just two miles from Praia da Luz between Saturday April 28 April and Saturday May 5 in 2007.

    Madeleine was snatched from her apartment while her doctor parents Kate, now 47, and Gerry, 46, dined nearby with friends.

    We tracked Mr Krokowski to his office in the Polish ¬capital. He admitted he enjoys taking pictures of ¬children on holiday but ¬that it was for ¬artistic purposes.

    In his first-ever newspaper interview he said: “I take ¬photos of old people, young people, landscapes and I have a lot of pictures from places like Thailand, Greece, Portugal, France, with kids on them.

    “But I never thought about kids as a sexual object. Nothing like this, never, never never. I am a simple man with normal sexual orientations.”

    Mr Krokowski revealed that although Polish police officers quizzed the couple and searched their apartment and the home of his father, they never ¬confiscated his camera or inspected his pictures.

    Goncalo Amaral, the controversial detective who led the original Portuguese investigation before he was replaced, has said he regretted that the Polish police probe into the couple was not taken further and that they did not seize Mr Krokowski’s camera and look at his holiday pics at that time.

    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.

    Our man met Mr Krokowski at the offices of his interior design business in a suburb of central Warsaw near the banks of the river Vistula. Smart and professional, Mr Krokowski was in a meeting when we first called but cut the session short in order to speak to us when we -explained who we were.

    cont.

    ReplyDelete
  9. cont.

    Over a couple of hours together he spoke at length about his involvement in the case and how he was eager to clear his name once and for all.

    He revealed the accusations had cast a shadow over him and his wife for eight years and that he had no idea he was being thought of as a suspect until ¬police knocked on his door.

    The couple were made a top priority by Portuguese detectives in the ¬immediate aftermath of Madeleine’s disappearance. They issued a CCTV picture of the Polish couple at a ¬shopping mall in Portugal which went round the world.

    The move came after a tourist claimed a man fitting Mr Krokowski’s appearance and driving a rental car was taking pictures of his children in the resort of Sagres just a 20-minute drive from Praia da Luz.

    The tourist claimed he feared the man wanted to kidnap his daughter, who he said bore a striking resemblance to Madeleine. But by the time the report was made, the Krokowskis had left for their Warsaw home. They pair were ¬approached by police within half an hour after returning.

    Their rental apartment in Portugal was also searched by forensic science experts but no charges were brought.

    Mr Krokowski said he has ¬taken a close interest in the case and was surprised he had not been ¬contacted since the early days of the investigation.

    He said: “I have followed this issue and know the British police are re-investigating.

    “They have not been in touch with me yet but of course I am ready to speak to them any time they want to.

    “Me and my wife came back to Poland via Berlin.

    “We came back on the Saturday evening and took the train to Warsaw on Sunday morning.

    “Half an hour after we got back the Polish police visited me at home and said they were there because of Madeleine.

    “I said, ‘Welcome, please look around, go through my flat.’

    “I flew back by plane and train, it would have been impossible to take someone with me.

    “They seemed satisfied with that and I was never contacted again.

    “But still on the internet I find the reports from the Portuguese police about us as ‘suspects’ and everything we were supposed to have done at this time.

    “I am never comfortable when I read this and see I am a suspect. It’s not so good.

    “I thought it was strange that I was a suspect. I am a normal man.

    “I like ¬children. I dream of having them but my wife has had some problems with alcohol and petty crimes over the years so we never had them.

    “But I am a great ‘father’ to my friend’s ¬children so it was a great pity for me that some -parents lost their daughter.”

    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.”

    The Sunday People can also reveal Operation Grange has been looking at possible leads in northern and central Europe.

    ReplyDelete
  10. VERY INTERESTING snippets from the Mirror article on "Sagresman":

    “Officers are scouring ¬hundreds of images from the camera of Wojciech Krokowski, from Poland.

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

    “The images British ¬detectives are looking at is in a batch of more than 100 handed over to us by the Pole during an interview.”

    “He said he was amazed he had not been contacted since police reopened the case in 2011. The Pole insisted: I am ready to speak to them any time they want.””

    “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.”

    “ “But still on the internet I find the reports from the Portuguese police about us as ‘suspects’ and everything we were supposed to have done at this time.

    “I am never comfortable when I read this and see I am a suspect. It’s not so good.

    “I thought it was strange that I was a suspect. I am a normal man.”

    “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.””

    How interesting? REALLY very interesting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Clarence been earning his retainer of thought to be around £28,000 PA?
      Look over here Nichola and not over there?

      Delete
    2. We have photographic evidence of people who where there that week.

      Delete
    3. Just realised we forgot to put up link:

      http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-examine-former-6699750?ICID=FB_mirror_main

      Delete
    4. Textusa did you ever do a post on this guy. I know you visited t he location of the alleged attempted abduction. On your recent visit and no doubt intent to write further on it.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous 26 Oct 2015, 09:09:00,

      No we haven't and we intend to do so soon.

      We, like you, find curious this coincidence of us saying we visited specifically the Sagresman location and this article.

      Surely it's just a coincidence otherwise we would be giving ourselves an importance we're certain we don't have.

      Delete
  11. Sounds like someone's possibly leaving no clutter unturned.

    ReplyDelete
  12. So when did he hand over the photos if police haven't contacted him since 2011? Have they been in touch recently, or obtained the photos pre-2011: he seems willing to hand over the same batch of photos (digital copies or from the negatives) to the newspaper? Has he done this? It's not clear, to me at least.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. May be he gave the pictures to Big Jim former CEOP Government official?

      Delete
  13. Another very interesting article. Things seem to be picking up pace...

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/6709337/100000-fraud-on-Maddie-McCann-search-fund.html

    ‘£100,000 fraud’ on Maddie fund
    WHISTLEBLOWER EXCLUSIVE: Search money rip-off claim

    THE fund to find Madeleine McCann was ripped off by up to £100,000, whistleblowers claim.

    Documents alleging the huge fraud have been handed to her parents Kate and Gerry.

    It is claimed a person connected to the hunt for the three-year-old used public donations to fund his own lifestyle. He is said to have duped the McCanns into thinking the cash was spent looking for their daughter.

    Two whistleblowers named the man in sworn affidavits which The Sun passed to the couple.

    They allege false accounting and forgery of travel and hotel receipts.

    One said: “What made the fraud so disgusting was money came from people who shed tears over her disappearance and wanted to do their little bit.”

    The Fund was launched in May 2007 when Madeleine disappeared from the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz.

    It has raised more than £2million. Backers include JK Rowling and David Beckham.

    There is no suggestion of any wrongdoing by Kate or Gerry who thanked The Sun for the evidence.

    Last night the McCanns’ spokesman said: “Madeleine’s Fund takes extremely seriously any suggestion monies intended for the search have been obtained fraudulently.

    “Kate, Gerry and the other directors of Madeleine’s Fund will co-operate fully with authorities to ensure these claims are fully investigated.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Obtained fraudulently, not spent in an underhanded way, you see. Isn't our Clarence worth his weight in gold?

      Delete
    2. http://portugalresident.com/amaral-supporters-plough-last-minute-money-into-legal-fund-as-uk-focuses-on-alleged-maddie-fraud

      Posted by portugalpress on October 27, 2015
      Amaral supporters plough last-minute money into legal fund as UK focuses on alleged Maddie fraud

      While the gofundme appeal buoying “Maddie cop” Gonçalo Amaral in his legal fight against the parents of Madeleine McCann is being temporarily wound down in Portugal, in UK news this week centres on an alleged fraud within the fund set up to find the missing child.

      According to the Sun newspaper, whistleblowers have presented damning evidence pointing to a “person connected to the hunt” for Madeleine using “public donations to fund his own lifestyle”.

      The Find Madeleine Fund has consequently been "ripped off" to the tune of over £100,000 - which Portuguese newspapers have translated as “almost €139,000”.

      With the story echoing a similar fraud uncovered years ago and centring on a private detective hired by the McCanns, this latest UK-generated Madeleine story follows a weekend exposé in the Sunday People, again covering ancient ground.

      In Portugal meantime, the friends and supporters of Amaral have decided to pull the gofundme online appeal launched six months ago by a single mother from Birmingham who was only 14 when Madeleine went missing.

      The last donations are still flowing in before the page is to be officially closed on Wednesday, October 28, having raised in excess of €73,000.

      The official reason for closure was that supporters felt there was “largely sufficient” in the fund’s account to “face eventual future expenses”.

      A source has since confirmed to the Resident that other forms of fundraising remain open, as the way ahead will almost certainly involve further appeals.

      For now, the decision by judges at Lisbon’s Appellate Court on Amaral’s appeal against the €500,000-plus damages awarded against him in the civil action taken out by the McCanns over his book “A Verdade da Mentira” is due any day.

      But the source explained to us that if the appeal is upheld - that is, if Amaral “wins” and at last sees his assets unfrozen after six years of litigation - “the McCanns will almost certainly appeal”.

      “The next step would be an appeal to the Supreme Court, and then even to the Constitutional Court,” said the source.

      And should Amaral lose the fight, which he feels centres on his right to freedom of expression, then a new online appeal will be needed to fund a case against Portuguese justice in the European Court of Human Rights.

      As the Resident explained six months ago when 22-year-old Leanne Baulch set up the gofundme page, the British tabloid press vilified the bid, saying it was powered by “sick online trolls”.

      Unpleasantness continued to the point where Ms Baulch - the single parent of a toddler - removed herself from the process altogether.

      It was then that the page transferred to the friends of Amaral. But the unpleasantness is understood to have continued, with internet manipulation of the appeal’s online code so that a few weeks ago it virtually disappeared from sight.

      In their announcement to the 2,791 subscribers sent out last Thursday, the group writing collectively said: “May we use this moment to wholeheartedly thank those who have expressed their support for Gonçalo Amaral’s right to an appropriate defence. Whether you have contributed financially or by sending a support message, you have made an impact. You have made a difference.”

      By NATASHA DONN natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

      Delete
  14. So, two whistleblowers seemed to contact the Sun newspaper and made sworn affidavits about this fraud. Not the police, locally, or Scotland Yard it seems, but the Sun. Not the family - Kate and Gerry - or other members of the Fund (of course) but the Sun. And Kate and Gerry thanked the Sun for the information (all on good speaking terms it seems). Mnn - I wonder who's playing tricks with whom. And who are the whistleblowers, and who is the man who forged hotel and travel expenses to fund his own lifestyle? And what year we are talking about, and what search?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I would urge all to be careful of commenting on any Sun facebook page. Remember when comments were never published. It could be that something is happening that is seriously alarming people. The comments, almost all negative as I can see could be used to say that it would be impossible for them to receive a fair trial!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 26 Oct 2015, 21:58:00,

      Very sound advice, thank you.

      Delete
    2. Data collection, it won't be the first time. Not accusing that particular tabloid, of course.

      Delete
  16. Interesting:

    http://news.sky.com/story/1577755/madeleine-search-dramatically-scaled-back

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Madeleine Search Dramatically Scaled Back

      The investigation into the three-year-old's disappearance has cost millions of pounds, but so far no one has been arrested.

      The number of Metropolitan Police staff investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is being dramatically reduced, from 29 to four.

      Despite the move, Scotland Yard insists the investigation has not yet reached its conclusion and "there are still focused lines of investigation to be pursued".

      "The Met investigation has been painstaking and thorough and has for the first time brought together in one place what was disparate information across the world," Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley, who has overseen the inquiry since 2012, said.

      "This work has enabled us to better understand events in Praia da Luz the night Madeleine McCann went missing and ensure every possible measure is being taken to find out what happened to her."

      Madeleine was three years old when she vanished while on a family holiday in Portugal in May 2007.

      Her parents Gerry and Kate McCann were dining with friends nearby their rented holiday apartment in Praia da Luz at the time.

      Portuguese police abandoned their investigation after 15 months without establishing any clues to the mystery, and for three years there was no official search for Madeleine.

      With Home Office backing, Scotland Yard began a review of evidence in 2011 and then launched a full-scale investigation two years ago.

      The probe has cost millions of pounds and spanned several countries, but so far no arrests have been made.

      Police say more than 60 "persons of interest" have been investigated, while 650 sex offenders have "been considered".

      Madeleine's parents say they "fully understand" why the police operation is being scaled back and remain hopeful there will be a breakthrough.

      "Whilst we do not know what happened to Madeleine, we remain hopeful that she may still be found given the ongoing lines of inquiry," they said.

      Their daughter's disappearance triggered one of the most high-profile missing persons investigations in British history.

      In 2014, a team of around 30 officers and police staff travelled to the area to Praia da Luz to search a four acre site not far from where the McCanns had been staying.

      And earlier this year, British detectives contacted their Australian counterparts after a young girl's body was found beside a highway in remote South Australia.

      However local police "totally excluded" the possibility it could be Madeleine.

      Delete
  17. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-34661256

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Madeleine McCann case: Police team cut to four

      The number of UK officers investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has been cut from 29 to four, London's Metropolitan Police has said.

      The Met said the "vast majority" of the work in its inquiry into Madeleine's disappearance had been completed.

      It said it was now following a "small number of focused lines of inquiry" which had allowed it to reduce its team's size.

      Madeleine's parents said they "fully understand" why the team had been cut.

      They said they remained "hopeful" their daughter would be found.

      Madeleine, from Rothley in Leicestershire, was three years old when she went missing from her family's holiday apartment at the Ocean Club in Praia da Luz on 3 May 2007.
      'Exceptional case'

      Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley, from the Met, said: "The Met was asked to take on this exceptional case as one of national interest.

      "We were happy to bring our expertise to bear only on the basis that it would not detract from the policing of London; and the Home Office have additionally funded the investigation above normal grants to the Met.

      "That will continue at the reduced level."

      Mr and Mrs McCann said: "We are reassured that the investigation to find Madeleine has been significantly progressed and the Met has a much clearer picture of the events in Praia da Luz leading up to Madeleine's abduction in 2007.

      "Given that the review phase of the investigation is essentially completed, we fully understand the reasons why the team is being reduced.

      "We would also like to thank the Home Office for continuing to support the investigation.

      "Whilst we do not know what happened to Madeleine, we remain hopeful that she may still be found given the ongoing lines of inquiry."
      'Potential sightings'

      Officers have now finished bringing together and investigating the information held by Portuguese police, the UK investigation and the private investigators working on behalf of the McCann family, the Met said.

      The force said the inquiry had taken 1,338 statements and collected 1,027 exhibits but had not reached a conclusion yet.

      Officers investigated more than 60 persons of interest, the Met said, adding that a total of 650 sex offenders had also been considered as well as reports of 8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine around the world.

      Having reviewed all of the documents, "7,154 actions were raised and 560 lines of inquiry identified", the Met said.

      It said more than 30 requests had been made to "countries across the world asking for work to be undertaken on behalf of the Met".

      Detectives have been working through material and following lines of inquiry since the Home Office requested a review of the case in May 2011.

      Operation Grange, which is supporting the Portuguese police, became a full investigation in July 2012.

      Delete
  18. Zip! Funny how the Sun newspaper publishes whistleblowers fraud allegations. A McCann twitter account closes down and today, Scotland Yard reduce their team to four!?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Ignoring the parents' predictable response, wonder what this means. No mention of Portuguese investigation with which they were apparently working well with. No mention of DCI Wall. Is this significant in that the Deciders have decided the 'ending' and what is to be revealed? Is this a 'warning' to Team Mc Cann Black Hats that they should begin to prepare themselves? Why have they seen fit to issue this information now? Just wondering

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Scotland Yard have said that the Portuguese team are leading the investigation and they are/were still 'helping them'.... Their statement is embedded in a news report, I will try and find it.

      Delete
  20. Ref my previous comment - I wrongly said there was no mention of Portuguese investigation in the article - however I see that at the bottom it does state 'Operation Grange, which is supporting the Portuguese police, became a full investigation in July 2012.'

    ReplyDelete
  21. Just looking at this small excerpt:
    "The Met said the "vast majority" of the work in its inquiry into Madeleine's disappearance had been completed.It said it was now following a "small number of focused lines of inquiry" which had allowed it to reduce its team's size."
    I feel slightly buoyed.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, just four coppers. That means two Tapas members for each copper, and one of them will have to cope with three of them!!!!

      Delete
  22. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/11960669/Madeleine-McCann-investigation-to-be-drastically-scaled-back-Scotland-Yard-says.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Madeleine McCann investigation to be drastically scaled back, Scotland Yard says

      Metropolitan Police says number of British officers working on investigation into disappearance of Madeleine McCann to be reduced from 29 to four

      The Scotland Yard investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann is being scaled down, it has been announced.

      Operation Grange, which was launched in 2011, will continue but will have the number of full time officers working on the case reduced from 29 to just four.

      Detectives have taken 1,338 statements and collected 1,027 exhibits, but a spokesman for the Metropolitan Police said: “While there remain lines of inquiry to follow, the vast majority of the work by Operation Grange has been completed.”

      The decision, which has been shared with Kate and Gerry McCann, comes after the Home Office granted another £2 million in order to continue with the investigation until next April.

      The cost of the investigation so far has been estimated at in excess of £10 million.

      Madeleine McCann disappeared from her parents’ holiday apartment in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz in May 2007, shortly before her fourth birthday.

      Since then her parents have campaigned tirelessly for the search to continue.

      In a statement the couple said they understood and accepted the reason behind the decison to scale back the investigation at this stage.

      They said: "We would like to thank all the staff from Operation Grange for the meticulous and painstaking work that they have carried out over the last four and a half years. The scale and difficulty of their task has never been in doubt.

      "We are reassured that the investigation to find Madeleine has been significantly progressed and the MPS has a much clearer picture of the events in Praia da Luz leading up to Madeleine's abduction in 2007.

      "Given that the review phase of the investigation is essentially completed, we fully understand the reasons why the team is being reduced.

      "We would also like to thank the Home Office for continuing to support the investigation.

      "Whilst we do not know what happened to Madeleine, we remain hopeful that she may still be found given the ongoing lines of enquiry. "

      Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley said "every possible measure" was being taken to find out what happened to Madeleine, who would now be 12-years-old.

      He said: "We still have very definite lines to pursue which is why we are keeping a dedicated team of officers working on the case. We have given this assurance to Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann."

      During Operation Grange detectives from the Met regularly travelled to the Algarve to liaise with their Portuguese counterparts and undertook a number of exploratory digs in the Praia da Luz area.

      Police said they had also investigated more than 60 persons of interest.

      A total of 650 sex offenders have also been considered as well as reports of 8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine around the world.

      In 2013 detectives working on Operation Grange announced they were looking into possible links between Madeleine’s disappearance and bogus charity collectors who were knocking on doors in Praia da Luz at the time.

      They issued a series of photo-fit images of suspects they said may have been hanging around the Algarve around the time Madeleine disappeared.

      Delete
    2. Subheadings to this article we think interesting:

      • Madeleine McCann's parents shut down Twitter account after being trolled by find Ben Needham supporters

      • Madeleine McCann: Portuguese detective appeals against order to pay McCanns £357,000

      Delete
    3. I wonder are they distancing themselves from the McCanns and paving the way for Dr. Amaral to win?

      Delete
  23. http://news.met.police.uk/news/update-on-the-investigation-into-the-disappearance-of-madeleine-mccann-135459?utm_campaign=mm_email_notification&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sendgrid

    Met posted it on Twitter using the #McCann hash tag. Unheard of !!

    ReplyDelete
  24. https://mobile.twitter.com/McCannCaseTweet/status/659413965273870336/photo/1

    McCann investigation, not M investigation. A careless or careful use of words?

    ReplyDelete
  25. Sounds like champers will be flowing for a certain group of cohorts, the fragrant Rebekah Brooks been busy at the helm for good old Rupert Murdoch and dodgy Dave Cameron,to "assist the McCanns"eh Dave?

    ReplyDelete
  26. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/28/met-reduces-officers-madeleine-mccann-case-29-to-four

    Nicola Wall continues to be in charge of the 4 remaining officers, according to Jessica Elgot of The Guardian

    ReplyDelete
  27. Watching the BBC news tonight, interesting to see the McCann news (scaling down of amount of Op Grange officers) followed immediately by a piece on Scams and victims of scams & fraudsters. Rather neat..

    ReplyDelete
  28. Lol textusa I see insane has taken the opportunity on the cristobell blog to rubbish the swinging theory and your blog. The rant was so long and focused on you that it was quite obvious that it really troubled him. And oh Nuala you must frighten him a bit he managed to throw you into the mix.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Hi Textusa,
    What is your take on this announcement? I know you have published your take on recent announcements and developments with regard to movement of the two sides but where does this Met move fit in?

    ReplyDelete
  30. Anonymous 29 Oct 2015, 11:06:00,

    Sorry to only be replying now but busy preparing tomorrow's post.

    As you might imagine doing more writing than reading but can tell you that we are very optimistic as we hope to show tomorrow.

    ReplyDelete
  31. From Isabel Oliveira, interesting as always:

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/HiDeHoCONTROVERSYofMadeleineMcCann/permalink/536105976545896/

    TALES OF THE UNEXPECTED

    A theory, nothing more than a theory trying to make sense of the last few events and naturally all a conjecture.

    The last few days have been confusing and I will steal Natasha’s words from the PT Resident to describe them: As often happens before any kind of ‘serious announcement’, fluff pieces have surfaced and almost instantly disappeared. "

    Generally this happens before any activity of OG in Portuguese territory. Being it the digs , a rogatory , questioning people, etc. This time, the media fluff it happened before a major announcement from Operation Grange.

    The feeling that something is happening is strong but so is my belief that OG is being cut and closed eventually in early 2016.

    At the moment , god knows what I will think tomorrow such is the mess, this is what is sort of falling as Tetris pieces in my confused info overloaded head.

    The articles we saw printed over the weekend are a reaction to OG being reduced to 4 people and eventually closed. In which way?

    The could be's to be read as could be's only:

    The end of OG transpired or was leaked, it originated the two articles we saw on the press this weekend:

    Article about the Polish man
    Article about a fraudster in OFM Fund by whistle blowers.

    Regarding the article about the Polish man , I continue to think that this was written as a defensive reaction by the house of Clarence, minimising damages before a public statement by this witness and , maybe others, are made. Why do I think that? The clear attempt to manipulate what the Polish man said about taking photographs of all people, not specifically children, hence an attempt to resuscitate the paedophile abducting monster myth . This will affect his credibility of anything he may say in the future or has already said but has not come to public. I believe a statement from this man , not necessarily to the police or certainly not to OG, has been made to someone and will become public in the next few weeks. That he has information that, although not groundbreaking in what happened to MM, will cast doubts into statements that were given and the settings we were presented with from the beginning. Because his statement or what he says may cause a turn in the timelines or events he needs to be discredited and hence, this article we saw in the Sunday people. ( by the way, did you realise that no unknown pictures of his holidays were posted in the said paper)?

    Regarding the article about the whistle blowers and fund fraud, most people thought this was about Halligen. That is not my view. This is about something and someone else and someone very close to the OFM nucleus that, by association, will compromise the fund as such. Halligen is an old and well known story, no need for whistle blowers for that at all. This is something new but only known by an insider to the fund.

    Both articles in context. One damage control article by Clarence house, but that has resulted from fear and a warning that someone will talk (and I do not think this is any of the T9 but a person or persons that were there at the same time, and another article clearly stating a recently discovered fraud in the OFM fund.

    Why before OG scaling down? Because someone wants to speak and someone wants the truth out. A warning that, you may scale down and close but we will talk .

    cont.

    ReplyDelete
  32. cont.

    Then we have one more curious point, the sudden constant mention by OG that this is a Portuguese case. Twice on their release and in a submissive tone. This hints that something happened at diplomatic level and institutionally something is not right. Someone in Portugal must have stressed this. It could be the PJ, it could be the Public Ministry. Something may have come up that definitely does not substantiate the abduction line of enquiry. That is another interesting point in the document, with OG finally calling it the proper name, “Disappearance” .

    “Operation Grange is working to support the Portuguese investigation and this work continues.”

    "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.”

    It is an admission of defeat, a submissive release that indicates the closing of OG. Some of the paragraphs actually sound like a KPI end of the year performance report, it shows accounting for the large amount of money spent but it also shows the end of OG.

    “The investigation team has taken 1,338 statements and collected 1,027 exhibits. Having reviewed all of the documents, 7,154 actions were raised and 560 lines of enquiry identified, and over thirty international request to countries across the world asking for work to be undertaken on behalf of the Met. Officers have investigated more than 60 persons of interest. A total of 650 sex offenders have also been considered as well as reports of 8,685 potential sightings of Madeleine around the world.”

    “While there remain lines of inquiry to follow, the vast majority of the work by Operation Grange has been completed”. My optimist side would like to read the lines of enquiry that have not been followed will be, but what jumps at me is that the work of OG has been completed.

    However, sometimes one is over reliant on nobody remembering things after a long while or maybe just linking things that had not clicked before. Someone that was in PDL has clicked or is tired of not saying something, someone wants this something investigated and made public. This someone , or some people, were warning OG that they may close or become a cold case but they have no intentions of staying or remaining quiet. And that is where everything gets interesting .

    ReplyDelete
  33. Apologies if I am repeating what may already have been noted, but what I find interesting in the bbc news article is in the time line they detail towards the end of the article. They mention ' smithman' seen carrying a child. The media doesn't often mention that these days and now he has reappeared...
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34661256

    ReplyDelete

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.

Textusa