Friday, 5 February 2016

A Triumph of Tycoons

Update 12Feb14: We will be breaking for the half-term holidays this week. We, will be back next week if there aren’t any surprises. Happy Valentine's day to all!

This post is a follow-up of our “Carman” post of last week.

There is no collective noun to describe tycoons, so we came up with our own – a triumph.

Stephen Winyard, owner of Stobo Castle health spa in Scotland and resident of Monaco, was the first tycoon to be named as a financial supporter of the McCanns. By May 10th 2007, Mr Winyard was reported to have made the offer of a million pound reward for information leading to the return of Madeleine. The offer was made earlier in the week through The Times.

Nothing more was written about Mr Winyard until December 2007, by which time, a triumph of tycoons had materialised, including John Geraghty. Mr Winyard is the answer to the questions we posed about the tests on the car stored in Mr Geraghty’s garage.  It was Mr Winyard who paid for the tests and who spoke about the results of the report refuting the claims made by the Portuguese police.

We are informed that it was Gerry McCann who had requested financial help from Mr Winyard in September and that Mr Winyard had “broken cover” to highlight the findings of the report, by Home Office - approved forensic scientists.

The Scotsman article of December 8 2007 by Michael Howie “Scots tycoon attacks 'scurrilous allegations' as he comes out as McCanns' secret funder” gives us all the details:

“ONE of Scotland's most wealthy businessmen can today be revealed as the mystery donor helping fund the fight to clear the names of Madeleine McCann's parents.  

Stephen Winyard, who owns the luxury Stobo Castle spa in Peebleshire, has spoken publicly for the first time since pledging £100,000 to help meet the escalating legal costs of Gerry and Kate McCann.
In an exclusive interview with The Scotsman, Mr Winyard revealed he has already paid for DNA tests carried out on the Renault Scenic hire car used by the McCanns nearly four weeks after Madeleine's disappearance.


The 58-year-old father-of-three has remained in the shadows since offering a £1million reward for four-year-old Madeleine's return in May. But he said he could no longer remain silent as "scurrilous allegations" continue to be directed towards Mr and Mrs McCann.

He said he wanted to highlight the results of the tests on DNA recovered from the car, and on hair samples from Kate McCann and Madeleine's brother and sister.

Portuguese police believe that DNA recovered from the boot of the car suggest Madeleine's body was carried inside the vehicle.

Meanwhile, Portuguese newspapers have alleged that hair samples from Kate and Gerry McCann's children show the couple sedated the two-year-old twins, Sean and Amelie, and Madeleine on the night she disappeared.

Mr Winyard stated that the findings of their own tests, by Home Office-approved forensic scientists, refuted these claims.

"The reason I am breaking cover is to highlight the findings of that report," he said. "The conclusion of the report was that no DNA was found that in any way implicated Gerry and Kate in Madeleine's disappearance.

"The further test that was commissioned, basically a hair drug test, also refuted the fairly scurrilous accusation that the twins were sedated or that Kate took sedatives herself."

Mr Winyard, who splits his time between Stobo Castle and his home in Monaco, was approached by Gerry McCann for financial help in September.

The businessman agreed to offer an initial sum of £100,000 - a figure matched by Virgin tycoon Sir Richard Branson.

Double-glazing magnate Brian Kennedy is also donating money to help the McCanns clear their name.

Mr Winyard said the three were sharing the costs between them. "I think the McCanns are entitled to the best legal defence they can muster to refute these scurrilous allegations.

"I remain absolutely confident there is totally insufficient evidence to link them to Madeleine's disappearance and I'm absolutely confident that in the fullness of time they will be fully exonerated," he said.

Mr Winyard "simply could not stand by and watch" as the couple endured the worst possible hell. "I think you have to be a parent to fully understand, to some degree, what they're going through, to understand their loss," he said.

Mr Winyard, who has met Gerry twice and Kate once, said the couple "deeply resented" the allegations made against them in the Portuguese press.

"Their main concern is to get their suspect status lifted so that the search for Madeleine can continue.

"Some of the reporting in the British press has been less than fair. The blanket coverage of every aspect of their lives, the littlest things that they do, creates, I think, the impression in people's minds that they are somehow responsible for what happened to Madeleine."

"This is all to do with getting the focus back on finding Madeleine. Both Gerry and Kate have been through an absolute nightmare over the last seven months and they're facing some very difficult weeks with Christmas coming up."

Mr Winyard criticised the lack of public support offered to the McCanns by the Prime Minister. Gordon Brown initially spoke to the McCanns several times on the phone. But since they were declared suspects by the Portugese authorities, lines of communication had come to a halt.

"This government was elected to look after its citizens," said Mr Winyard, "and it's fair to say it's a fundamental principle of our legal system that everyone is presumed innocent until proven guilty.

"With that in mind, I would really strongly urge that Gordon Brown, who has previously been really supportive, accede to our request for a meeting at ministerial level."

He acknowledged that the McCanns' decision to leave their children in their apartment at Praia da Luz while they dined had "divided opinion".

"It is something the McCanns will have to live with," he said.

A Downing Street spokesman said: "We do not comment on ongoing cases."”

Brian Kennedy, double glazing tycoon and Virgin tycoon Richard Branson had agreed to share the costs, specifically for the best legal defence for the McCanns. In the Telegraph article by Fiona Govan of November 20 2007, “McCann team tests car for traces of Madeleine Kennedy confirmed tests had taken place: “We did our own tests on the hire car and found no traces of Madeleine.”

We can only assume that these tests were the ones said to have been done by those “scientists, wearing protective white suits and using the latest techniques and equipment, dismantled the car in the double garage of a Pounds 1 million villa owned by a friend of the McCanns-wealthy British tycoon John Geraghty, 68” as stated in the News Of The World article of September 30 2007 by Dominic Herbert “Undercover Brits’ secret tests on car”.

Geraghty, who up to last week everyone thought had connections with Leicester, which he didn’t, and who up to then everyone also thought was a completely different man physically:

Presumably, Branson as a financial contributor was also aware of the findings, but as Geraghty was not referred to as one of the financial donors, was he also informed of the report’s findings?

There is no reference to these tests in the PJ files and no further mention of them after December 2007.

In conclusion, we still don’t know:

Which Home Office - approved scientists conducted and reported on the tests.

Who, apart from Mr Winyard, Kennedy and probably Branson, were informed of the results.

Whether these results were sent to any police force.

Why results supposedly favourable to the McCanns were never referred to by the McCanns or their immediate circle and were not forwarded to the PJ at the time, or the FSS in Birmingham.

Acknowledgement: We would like to acknowledge Crimeshots through which we found the Scotsman article quoted in current post.


  1. Why did the Mc Cann team need to do DNA tests on hire car anyway?- surely they already knew they were innocent and had no need to prove it to themselves.
    Branson, Winward, Kennedy, Geraghty - a triumph of tycoons brought together by the disappearance of Madelene Mc Cann. Will the power of their money prevail?

    1. MAYBE it was the possible presence of someone else's DNA that concerned them. The Scenic car just had to be used for Madeleine's 'transfer' before the abduction cry went up, possibly days before. To my mind the Scenic's true whereabouts whilst it was 'off the radar' for three weeks is vital to solving this case.

    2. I think you may be right there, on both counts. I do think the car possibly received a jolly good 'forensic cleansing' whilst in storage. Therefore storage had to be secure, out of sight, in protected area.
      I also believe it likely that the car was used for transferring the body and as you say, most likely whilst it was 'off radar'.

      Media reported that Kate branded the allegation “far-fetched” and added: “It was about Madeleine being killed and us having moved the body and then storing her in a freezer and then transporting the body in a hire car several weeks later."
      Kate tried to make the idea sound incredulous and I'm guessing what she said was correct apart from the 'several weeks later' bit!
      Media at the time reported that "A bloody footprint was found in Kate and Gerry McCann's apartment, matching a print on their hire car, according to a forensic report shown to The Mail on Sunday.
      The existence of the two marks, which has never been revealed until today, is apparently at the heart of renewed suspicion that the couple were involved in their daughter's disappearance."

    3. Anonymous 8 Feb 2016, 12:08:00,

      The bloody footprint is not on the PJ Files. If there had been one it would have been.

      There was never one. Referring to it is to misinform.

      The car was never "on radar", so we don't know what you mean by "off-radar".

      If the car was hired several weeks later, then the expression "several weeks later" would be correct, but only if Kate was using the truth to throw sand in our eyes.

      To say that when she says “It was about Madeleine being killed and us having moved the body and then storing her in a freezer and then transporting the body in a hire car several weeks later" (quoting you quoting her) is correct is pure speculation on your part, although in our opinion that is not far from the truth.

  2. I have always found it very odd that so many wealthy and influential people quickly fell over themselves to help out this couple that they had no apparent connection to when the papers are full of poor people who have suffered dreadful misfortunes every day. It happened so soon after Madeleine disappeared and you might have expected these powerful folk to hold back and see how the evidence developed, especially as the couple had apparently left vulnerable children alone in a flat night after night.
    I really don't believe that all these powerful people were somehow involved in bad goings on in PdL, but I do suspect there was a reason for the McCanns being the target of so much largesse and defence of character. I will always remember how, in the early days, whenever the papers or TV referred to the case they didn't just use the obvious phrase 'find Madeleine', they repeatedly used the rather convoluted and overly 'branded' fund name "Leaving No Stone Unturned". Why? What have stones got to do with anything? Especially when, as it turned out, there were quite a few metaphorical stones the couple were deeply unwilling to turn over - specifically answering police questions.
    But 'stones' are very central to the work of masons and I wonder if the repeated use of such a key word could account for the McCanns' huge support among the influential? This is not to suggest that any masonic supporters were involved in any crime, or even that they believed the McCanns to have committed a crime - they were just predisposed to take the part of one of their own. Does anybody know whether Branson, Winward, Kennedy and Geraghty have any masonic connections?

  3. It never fails to amaze me the "kindness of strangers" and particularly wealthy good Samaritans. You have to be a bit special and exude honest humanity to attract such benevolence. Or does the prescence of these sharks just make the pool look more dangerous! Great as usual!

  4. Textusa, your friend Not Textusa has just said this on his blog "Mr Geraghty is hardly a tycoon".
    I have a question for you Mr Not Textusa: how do you know Mr Geraghty is hardly a tycoon?
    Are you familiar with the man and how much is exactly his wealth?

    1. Is your glorious leader familiar with his wealth? Then how can she call him a tycoon?

      It would be a very unusual tycoon where people were so unaware of his existence that they didn't realise they were looking at a picture of the wrong man for 9 years......

    2. Not Textusa I’m Anon 5 Feb 2016, 19:20:00
      I’ll sign as XYZ so you know it’s me.
      I asked you the question and not Textusa. If I want to ask her something I will.
      You say “It would be a very unusual tycoon where people were so unaware of his existence that they didn't realise they were looking at a picture of the wrong man for 9 years......”
      If I was shown a photo of Stephen Winyard I wouldn’t know him from another man. I only heard of Brian Kennedy after Maddie. Before then, his face would mean nothing to me.
      Richard Branson I would know but he makes a point of having his face known. You confuse celebrity tycoons with tycoons. I live in Portugal and spend my holidays in the Algarve. When I go to the Marina of Vilamoura I see dozens of enormous yachts. Really big and luxurious yachts, those that only tycoons have. Lots Ferraris and Lamborghinis parked there. I see people get in and out of the yachts and expensive cars and I don’t know any of them.
      I drive by Quinta do Lago and there are hundreds of enormous mansions. Only tycoons have them. I don't think I know any of them. Same in Quinta da Marinha in Cascais.
      Tycoons have no desire for recognition by regular people unless their business is based on their image. Tycoons are known to those they exercise power over but not necessarily by us little people.
      So I ask you again, how do you know John Geraghty is hardly a tycoon?


    3. And I ask you again - how do you know that he is?

      This article describes him as such, yet I have seen no evidence to support it. So where is it?

      I make no mistake with respect to celebrity. Just because you don't recognise them, it does not follow that someone clued up wouldn't.

    4. Not Textusa, your question: "And I ask you again - how do you know that he is?"
      My answer: I don't know. I have never said he was nor that he wasn't.
      You have said he's "hardly a tycoon".
      I'll ask you again, how do you know he's hardly a tycoon?


    5. I am not even vaguely interested in how you described him. Textusa described him as a ''tycoon''. I would like to know on what basis. He is described as being the owner of a million pound villa. As in many parts of the UK even a relatively modest family home can cost half a million, that scarcely qualifies as ''tycoon'' country.

      So perhaps she can provide some justification for this description?

    6. Not Textusa,
      If you weren't vaguely interested you shouldn't have asked.
      Stop running behind Textusa's skirts. My question has nothing to do with what she said or didn't say. My question has to do with what you said.
      You said John Geraghty "is hardly a tycoon". I'm asking you a very simple question: how do you know John Geraghty is hardly a tycoon"?


    7. Listen, I can happily do this all day. Now go away; send the organ grinder when you go back for your nuts

    8. Not Textusa, thank you for admitting that you cannot answer why you are able to say with some knowledge why John Geraghty was "hardly a tycoon" (your words).
      The best that you came up with was "He is described as being the owner of a million pound villa. As in many parts of the UK even a relatively modest family home can cost half a million, that scarcely qualifies as ''tycoon'' country." I could ask how do you know John Geraghty only owns one million pound villa. That is the value given by the article to the villa where tests on Scenic were done but how do you know John Geragthy doesn't have other properties around the world? I won't ask because I know you won't answer, so I'll move on.
      I have another question for you but I'll put it as a separate comment.


    9. Oh do go away, you are boring me now. That "Thank you for admitting..." cobblers might work at your level, dear, but it's a bit "Amateur Hour"
      We have a collective noun for your type. Oh, but you know that already......

    10. Not Textusa,

      Sorry for boring you. No, I do not know the collective noun for my type but you know what I would like to know before I knew that? It's why you are able to say John Geraghty "is hardly a tycoon".
      Care to explain why?


    11. Now that enough time has elapsed to make it clear that Insane has abandoned this fight with XYZ, let us clarify our readers about our position about John Geraghty being or not a tycoon.

      We don't know if John Geraghty is a tycoon or not - only that press describe him as such.

      It’s Dominic Herbert from NOTW who says “in the double garage of a Pounds 1 million villa owned by a friend of the McCanns-wealthy British tycoon John Geraghty, 68.”

      We have said very clearly in our Carman post the following "Whether the press description of Mr Geraghty as a “tycoon” – a rich and powerful man – is an accurate statement, those who know him can say better than we can."

      We also said we in current post that he was not a financial donor “…but as Geraghty was not referred to as one of the financial donors, was he also informed of the report’s findings?.”

      That makes it perfectly clear on whether we say that John Geraghty is or not a tycoon.

      Some tycoons are well-known, others are not. John Geraghty, if a tycoon, is not a well-known one, or even well-known before Maddie. If he’s a tycoon.

      But when Insane says he's “hardly a tycoon” it means he knows more than we do.

      Question has to be asked (and it was repeatedly put fruitlessly by reader XYZ to Insane) how does Insane know what his status is?

      Unless he knows him.

      And why is he so keen to say John Geraghty isn't a tycoon?

    12. No, it means that when you described him as a "tycoon" you had no idea whether that was an appropriate description or not.

  5. @ Anonymous5 Feb 2016, 19:20:00
    Yes let's invite Not Textusa to comment...... to sex-up this non-post a bit

  6. "Mr Winyard, who splits his time between Stobo Castle and his home in Monaco, was approached by Gerry McCann for financial help in September."

    ...approached by Gerry McCann!!! Why?! Did they know each other before?
    Did Gerry also "approach" the other tycoons?!

    I was under the impression that those "Tycoons" offered help and support spontaneously...

    1. Winyard was one of the first people to offer financial help, in May. They didn't know him prior to that.

    2. Not Textusa,

      Thought best to put my next question to you here because it's related with Stephen Winyard.
      How do you know the McCanns didn't know Stephen Winyard prior to him offering financial help?

    3. Not Textusa,

      Sorry, forgot to sign.
      Comment above @21:32 is mine.


    4. XYZ 6 Feb 2016, 21:32:00 and 21:57:00

      That's a very good question.

      How DOES Not Textusa know that the McCanns didn't know Stephen Winyard prior to May ?

      What inside information does Not Textusa have that he can categorically state that ?

      Does he know the McCanns ?


    5. Because they said so. I'm sorry if it's difficult for you to keep up.

    6. Not Textusa 6 Feb 2016, 22:59:00

      WHEN and WHERE have they said so?


    7. Nuala,
      I was thinking of asking Not Textusa the exact same thing but it won't make any difference, he'll do his usual wriggling act.


    8. XYZ 6 Feb 2016, 23:19:00

      Ah no, I'm sure Not Textusa can back up what he said with some PROOF :)


    9. Censored comment received from Insane:

      "Not Textusa has left a new comment on your post "A Triumph of Tycoons":

      If you two can't be bothered to do your research, that's your problem. (censored)

      Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 7 Feb 2016, 12:38:00"

    10. Ah the transparent "do your own research" tactic so beloved by the incompetent. It goes like this:

      Person A says: "The moon is made of green cheese"
      Person B says: "Where did you get that information from?"
      Person A says: "Do your own research"

      Thus leaving Person A looking impotent and ridiculous because they made a statement they couldn't back up with any evidence.

      In this case Not Textusa said "Winyard was one of the first people to offer financial help, in May. They didn't know him prior to that." and when asked where he got that information from he won't tell us. Now this could be for two reasons:

      1) Not Textusa knows the McCanns well, and is perhaps either a close friend or relative, and so knows positively that the McCanns didn't know Mr Winyward prior to May. In which case, of course, he can't admit that, so uses the "do your own research" tactic.


      2) Not Textusa doesn't know the McCanns, has no idea whether or not they knew Mr Wynyard prior to May, and in fact made up what he said. In which case, of course, he can't admit that, so again uses the "do your own research" tactic.

      All very transparent, and all very predictable :)


    11. Censored comment received from Insane:

      "Not Textusa has left a new comment on your post "A Triumph of Tycoons":

      Or, (censored), it's because it's in her book......

      Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 7 Feb 2016, 17:29:00"

    12. Whose book? Kate McCann's book?

      If so, all she says is that when he offered the McCanns reward money in May 2007 Stephen Winyard "had so far never even met us" so that means nothing for two reasons:

      1) Just because Stephen Winyard hadn't met the McCanns didn't mean they didn't know one another. Meeting someone and knowing them are two different things. People can know one another for YEARS before actually meeting.

      2) Since when is Kate McCann's book any proof of anything, bearing in mind it's full of lies?


    13. Not Textusa could you please confirm the book you're referring to is Kate McCann's book and the passage is the one Nuala is mentioning.



    "It has also emerged that an independent forensic team from the UK has stripped the McCanns' hire car.

    The forensic scientists - who spent more than nine hours examining the vehicle - have been hired by the McCanns to rubbish Portuguese police "evidence".

    The Renault has been at the centre of the detectives' claims against the couple since they were both named as arguidos at the beginning of the month.

    Portuguese newspapers reported that DNA found in the car boot indicated Madeleine's blood, hair and bodily fluids.

    The car had been garaged at the home of John Geraghty, a friend of the McCanns, near Praia da Luz.

    A source said the team "took as many samples as possible".

    "It was an extremely thorough job."

    The car has since been returned to the Budget rental company at Faro Aiport.

    British scientists who carried out tests on the car for the Portuguese police have said their results have been "twisted".

    The Forensic Science Service in Birmingham is reported to have written to the detectives complaining that they had "wildly misused" their findings.

    Today the family are marking 150 days since Madeleine disappeared."

  8. Do Not Publish at 6 Feb 2016, 16:45:00

    Thank you!

  9. Insane really seems to know his tycoons well!!!

  10. I see Insane is being spectacularly rude and arrogant as though the blog is platform for his use. He thinks he is so clever but he makes it obvious he has inside knowledge so maybe he should start acknowledge that?

  11. To those thinking we’re making a great fuss about John Geraghty being or not a tycoon, we are not.

    The only one making a fuss about that is Insane.

    We would like to make it clear that for the case it’s completely indifferent if John Geraghty is or not a tycoon. Whatever his wealth may be is totally irrelevant.

    What concerns us about John Geraghty is that there were 2 misunderstandings about him and something that happened in his property according to press reports.

    The first misunderstanding was about what he looked like physically (which isn’t that important besides the fact that a man “took” his place and that fact was not corrected all these years, including by bloggers who reside in Praia da Luz) and the second about him having, which he doesn’t, Leicester connections which could link him to the McCanns prior Maddie disappeared.

    We dealt with those 2 misunderstandings that took place over the years in our post “Carman”.

    “The Triumph of Tycoons” post is about how some very wealthy people paid for forensics tests done in the Renault Scenic outside the legitimate investigation.

    These tests were done, according to various press reports, in John Geraghty’s property. This, obviously makes John Geraghty a person of interest to the case.

    In the particular case of the tests, he’s of interest alongside those who paid for the tests and those who did them.

    We remind readers that these tests were done during the ongoing investigation. A group of “volunteers” decided to sideline the police, the only legitimate entity to do criminal investigation, and did their own investigation alongside the official one. And boasted about doing it on a car, according to the press parked in John Geraghty’s property.

    That had already been forensically tested by the rightful and legitimate authorities them.
    Now, let’s stop and see the ridiculousness of the situation. One reason it’s said that the tests were being done is because hairs were found which supposedly the Portuguese police leaked to the press belonged to Maddie.

    If that were true, what would these new tests prove? Nothing because the hairs in question would no longer be in the vehicle and any new hairs said to have been found by this group of “scientists” would not disprove a single thing because they weren’t the ones the official forensics would have been referring to.

    So why the tests? Maybe to test that no other vestige would ever be found in that car ever again? Could be, but that’s pure speculation.

    What is relevant in what concerns John Geraghty, is that these forensics tests were done, according to press reports, in his property, so we’re assuming with his consent.

    Maybe all the fuss made by Insane about John Geraghty “tycoonness” – which is completely irrelevant – is simply to drive all discussion away from whatever possible role he may have had in the forensic testing of dubious legality – without any known results to this day – of the Scenic as well as why all these years he had his identity “protected” by another man alongside the myth of Leicester connections he didn’t have.

  12. Giles Tremlett, Brendan de Beer in Praia da Luz and Esther Addley
    The Guardian, Thursday 13 September 2007
    "The parents of Madeleine McCann are considering commissioning their own independent forensic testing of the vehicle in which the Portuguese police allege that traces of their missing daughter's body were found, it was reported yesterday.
    A Portuguese magistrate is currently studying a dossier of evidence against Kate and Gerry McCann, which includes details of their daughter's DNA allegedly found in their hired Renault Scenic car. The evidence is said to relate to two samples found in the car, one of blood, the other of unspecified bodily fluids, and to a further quantity of hair allegedly discovered in the car's boot.

    But the BBC last night quoted a source close to Mr and Mrs McCann who said they were considering carrying out their own tests on the vehicle, which was being kept in a "safe place to avoid any possibility of evidence being planted".

    Local police are investigating a theory that the couple killed their daughter on May 3, perhaps by accident, and used the vehicle to transport her body at a later time. The Renault was not hired until 25 days after Madeleine disappeared from the family's holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, southern Portugal. Mr and Mrs McCann have spoken of their fears that they are being framed."

    Geraghty was / is a member of Boavista Golf Club and a past Captain so one could say probably quite a key member. Gery was / is a keen golfer and allegedly had played golf in Portugal prior to their 2007 holiday. I think it is certainly a possibility that Gerry may have met JG previously.

  13. Censored comment received from Insane:

    "Not Textusa has left a new comment on your post "A Triumph of Tycoons":

    Have you no idea how investigations are conducted?
    When someone is charged with a crime, or it looks like they may be charged, they have the right to collect evidence in their defence. This may include commissioning their own tests, post mortems etc. There is nothing dubious or illegal about it.


    Posted by Not Textusa to Textusa at 7 Feb 2016, 17:32:00"

    1. Insane,

      It's you who have no idea how criminal investigations are conducted in Portugal.

      The duty to collect evidence is exclusive to the state.

      If a citizen feels he will be charged (by the way it is what the arguido status is all about) then he should request whatever diligences he feels will best defend his interests to the legitimate authorities.

      These will either execute them (and only they are legally allowed to do so) or will not. If they don't they have to justify the reasons for the refusal.

      The alleged tests done by those alleged scientists to the Scenic in John Geraghty's property have absolutely no legal value in Portugal.

      After so many years dedicated daily to the case, we expected you would know better.

    2. Dear me, you genuinely don't have a clue, do you?

    3. Anonymous 8 Feb 2016, 19:52:00,

      Dear you, do enlighten us then.

  14. To this day I still cannot understand how that car was not permanently "held in custody" by the police! How was it possible that it was let to be stored by the suspects and their "helpers"...

    1. I agree - it seems absurd in hindsight, although I'm not familiar with these processes. However, maybe they had collected the forensic evidence and stored it and believed there was no further need for the car itself. Team Mc Cann appeared to push the story that they stored it to prevent police 'planting' evidence..and / or they did their own tests to rubbish the tests arranged by the PJ. Either way - it it was probably IMO to deflect from their real concern - to clinically clean the damn thing and prevent further evidence from being found.

    2. Unpublished caroleann 8 Feb 2016, 11:35:00

      Thank you for your comment but we are not publishing it because we very strongly believe in Maddie’s death around late afternoon, early evening of May 3rd and not before that.

      We will definitely not contribute for such a debate.

  15. I guess the PJ had what they wanted. The tests were complete as far as they were concerned. I suppose storing car implies someone also continued to hire said vehichle as it belonged to rental company... That's how they could keep it!

  16. Courtesy of :
    Private security team hired by Kate and Gerry McCann for secret investigation The Times

    David Brown in Praia da Luz and Patrick Foster
    September 24, 2007

    The rich list bankrolling the McCanns

    Brian Kennedy Made £250 million from double glazing and home improvements and now owns Latium Group plastics and Sale Sharks rugby union team. Offered Latium's in-house lawyer and is paying the McCanns' new official spokesman, Clarence Mitchell

    Sir Richard Branson Contributed to rewards totalling £2.5 million after Madeleine's disappearance. Has spoken to the McCanns several times and this month donated £100,000 to a fund for their legal costs. "I trust them implicitly," he said. Is trying to encourage other wealthy people to contribute to the legal fund

    Sir Philip Green The billionaire owner of TopShop and BHS lent the McCanns his private jet for their visit to meet the Pope. Known to have been annoyed when news of his involvement emerged and has refused to comment on his current involvement

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

  17. Not for publishing at 8 Feb 2016, 15:29:00,

    Agree, very strange indeed.

  18. I have noticed a lot of anti sites lately have been very pro active in defending anyone outside the Tapas 9

  19. Regarding this case, bearing in mind the desire of some to conceal the truth at all cost, I am wondering if there are those who would actually kill to prevent the truth from emerging (or may even already have done so)? Sadly, it would not surprise me.

  20. DO NOT PUBLISH 10 Feb 2016, 15:28:00,

    The snipped link you refer to, regarding the sirens allegedly heard by Robert and Jenny Murat is to our post "All the world’s a stage 1/3"

  21. Seen on CMOMM at 15.45 approx......

    Ahead of some exclusive information that will be posted on this forum soon (teaser trailer alert big grin ) I am posting this video (uploaded by Joana Morais in 2010) as it is part of the new upcoming info.

    For some reason the video starts half way through.You have to start it again at the beginning and listen to Francisco Marco at 1;27, who says when talking about Maddie McCann: "I know the kidnapper, and we know where he is. We know who he is, and we know how he has done it . . ."

    The two emails reproduced below (with permission) are between PeterMac and 'Bates, Wells, Braithwaite', the McCann's lawyers.

    Then compare Marco's comment from the youtube video with the reply from BatesWellsBraithwaite:

    11 January 2008
    Dear Sir,
    Madeleine’s Fund - Leaving No Stone Unturned Limited

    We acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 22 December 2007 which was also sent to the auditors of Madeleine’s Fund, Haysmacintyre. We are also replying on behalf of Haysmacintyre.
    We are advised by our client that reports in the media purporting to be from the investigators, which made claims as to when Madeleine would be found are inaccurate and misrepresentations of their views.

    Our client has every confidence in the investigators who continue the search for Madeleine.

    Yours faithfully
    Bates Wells & Braithwaite London LLP

    and this is PeterMac's later letter....etc

    What do you make of this ladies ......would appreciate your thoughts.....thanks

    1. Anonymous 11 Feb 2016, 17:46:00,

      Apologise only answering now.

      Like we said then with all the teasers before the Summers & Swan book and the Sonia Poulton documentary, we will now also wait and see what product will be presented before saying anything about it.

    2. Anonymous 11 Feb 2016, 17:46:00,

      Having now read it, we see that it's basically a falling out between crooks.

      We don't see any great value in the revelations as we knew M3 were crooks and the authors remained part of the organisation to the last, so who can rely on their word about anything?

    3. And it may just help clarify this:

      "According to The Sun, the two whistleblowers wrote in sworn affidavits that a man close to the search for the three-year-old defrauded the public and tricked Kate and Gerry McCann into believing the cash was being used to help find their daughter.

      The pair say that the unnamed man forged travel and hotel receipts to hide the deception"

      The pair, Peribanez and Tamarit?

  22. Found this slightly interesting! Courtesy of Mc Cann files

    The delightful Vanessa Branson bought Jose Maria Cano’s Renault Scenic, a encaustic painting of the iconic news photo of the parents of kidnap victim Madeline McCann driving the eponymous vehicle, for £22,000. The purchase was a meaningful one, considering Branson’s brother, Virgin CEO Richard Branson, generously donated £100,000 to help the McCanns search for their missing daughter.

    Renault Scenic painting (2007)


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.