The Great American Spy

Fascinating the double standards that people who are on the internet about the Maddie case have.

If we say that the Tapas staff lied about the T9 and their alleged presence in the esplanade during that fateful week of 2007, we are mercilessly accused of maligning those poor people who already have had to bear the burden of being unlucky of ever having crossed paths with the T9 which caused some of them to have lost their jobs.

We would like to remind readers that out of the 50 “Restaurant & Bar” workers employed by the Ocean Club at the time, 44 had been recently hired, meaning they would lose their jobs at the end of the summer had they crossed paths with the T9 or not.

But what matters is that now someone comes along and calls the Tapas staff liars and not only gets away with it, he’s also praised for doing so.

We’re evidently talking about Joe Moura, the PI.

“Voice over: While the McCanns admit they left their children alone in an unlocked apartment, they have always maintained there were frequent checks.

Gerry McCann: We actually checked on the children extremely regularly, we did not leave them alone…

Voice over: But Joe Moura’s investigation raises serious questions about that plan. He spoke with resort employees who served the group that night

Peter Von Sant: The McCanns claim they got up about every 30 minutes to go check on the kids, is that true?

Joe Moura: No. But the witnesses are saying that there was one male who did get up and walked in the direction of going to the apartment.”

Isn’t Joe Moura calling all those members of the staff who stated in the PJ Files that members (plural) of that group got up regularly (not only one male and apparently only on one occasion) and left the table presumably to go check the children, liars?

He is, and yet there has been no outrage from the internet against this.

In fact, in the article by Mark Saunokonoko for 9news on Apr 9, 2019, couldn’t be clearer on its headline: “Undercover investigator claims 'nobody left the table' to check kids on night Maddie disappeared”

Isn’t that “nobody left the table” stating very clearly that the Tapas staff lied? It is.

So why was there no backlash against this?

In fact, what we have read is people confirming they believe the Tapas staff lied by saying that the article confirms that they were even more negligent than the world thought! That they said they checked but they didn’t, that they left the kids alone all night!

According to this reasoning, then the Tapas staff lied to protect the McCanns, apparently, to make them seem less negligent than they were supposed to have been.

It seems people are prepared to accept that the Tapas staff lied to protect the McCanns. And that the same staff has kept this secret – has not sold the story to the papers saying how much more neglectful the Tapas had been – even though they lost their jobs.

Joe Moura says the Tapas staff has lied, he’s cheered on. We say the Tapas staff has lied and we immediately get jumped on. Why is that?

Well, it would be unfair to say he was cheered on. Very few voices have. But what we haven’t seen is anyone openly calling Joe Moura out.

Why? Is it because he appears in one of Mark S Saunokonoko’s podcast and article so best make Moura just one more elephant in the room – they are now becoming a herd – and pretend he’s not said what he’s said?

As we have shown in a comment, the photo above used in the 9news article comes from a video from CBS’ 48 Hours programme about Maddie aired in November 2007.

We have found it odd for them to use one where he sits inside the Tapas bar when there’s an image, above, of him sitting in the esplanade which we would think more appropriate to the topic.

But it’s not up to us to make the editorial decisions and we must respect the ones made by those with the authority and place to make them.

But let’s see what Joe Moura says in this video:

We transcribed the 2 parts where he appears.

From 15:33 to 17:51:

Joseph Moura (JM): …a lot of facts in this case are not available, those facts are held strictly by the police, but as an investigator and looking into this situation, there’s many ways to skin a cat, I mean you certainly…

Voice over (VO): Joe Moura, a Boston based private eye, has worked cases in Portugal.

JM: I was born in Portugal so I speak Portuguese fluently.

VO: 48 Hours hired Moura to go undercover at the Ocean Club.

JM (speaking to Tapas bartender): “Hello, a gente paga quando vem para trás, ok?”

VO: His assignment, determine if Maddie was abducted or if her parents were involved. He familiarised himself with the layout of the resort, the McCann’s apartment and its proximity to the Tapas bar, where the McCanns ate that night.

JM (speaking to Tapas waiter): “Hey, how are you?”

VO: He immediately discovered something that raised doubts about the McCanns original story.

Gerry McCann (GM): It’s a similar scenario to dining in your garden, we were very close…

VO: ‘Close enough’ the McCanns told authorities that they could watch the door of their apartment while at dinner.

Peter Von Sant (PVS): You sat at the very table where the McCanns were eating and drinking, correct?

JM: And more than once, yes.

PVS: Could you see those sliding doors?

JM: It’s impossible. There is a wall, there’s hedges on top of that wall. They would have absolutely no possibility of seeing someone going in or out of that apartment from where they were that evening.

VO: After befriending employees...

JM (speaking to the Tapas bartender): “…tavas, pá… tavas mais…”

VO: …Moura uncovered important details of the McCanns and their friends’ dinner routine… [here the video seems to have been cut off] …important details of the McCanns and their friends’ dinner routine.

JM: Their routine was similar, they arrived at 08:30 for dinner and then they would stay until 12, 12:30 am. We even know, for example, how many bottles of wine they had…

PVS: How many?

JM: Well, they had been reported in the media they had been drinking 14 bottles of wine but my sources say no, it was 6 or 7 bottles of wine routinely every evening.

VO: Joe Moura is not the only person focusing in on the McCanns’ nightly routine at the Ocean Club…


From 30:53 to 36:35

JM (speaking to Tapas waiter): “…relaxed and smiling today, how are you?”

VO: Throughout his time of working under cover for 48 Hours, no one at the Ocean Club ever discovered who Joe Moura really was.

JM: My strategy was to first build confidence, I had to infiltrate, you know what I mean?

VO: Moura focused on what happened at this dinner table on May the 3rd, where the McCanns and friends would meet.

JM: They had a table reserved for the nine of them every evening…

PVS: So night after night, this was the pattern… they, they did their things during the day and then all the adults would gather at that restaurant to eat and drink?

JM: That was the routine.

PVS: Was there ever a time that the kids were… were included?

JM: No, the routine was just adults.

VO: While the McCanns admit they left their children alone in an unlocked apartment, they have always maintained there were frequent checks.

GM: We actually checked on the children extremely regularly, we did not leave them alone…

VO: But Joe Moura’s investigation raises serious questions about that plan. He spoke with resort employees who served the group that night.

PVS: The McCanns claim they got up about every 30 minutes to go check on the kids, is that true?

JM: No. But the witnesses are saying that there was one male who did get up and walked in the direction of going to the apartment.

VO: But witnesses were serving others that night, so they may not have seen all the comings and goings.

JM: What the employees are saying is that you may think you’re checking every 15 minutes but when you’re opening… you’re pouring your wine, you’re having your after-dinner coffees, 15 minutes goes by awful fast, so you’re really not keeping track of what the real time is.

VO: Joe suggests that after 5 nights of going out and leaving the kids behind, the parents had developed a false sense of security.

JM: It’s a situation, there’s a pattern, there’s a habit, they did it once, they did it twice, there was no problem, they checked on their own children, again no problems, guess what, on the sixth night there was a problem.

VO: Employees also told Moura that the McCanns were acting normally that night, something he believes would not be possible if they had just killed their daughter.

JM: You’re saying that they killed their daughter, they were able to go join their… other friends, having dinner like nothing happened? I’m not buying it, it didn’t happen, that’s a crazy thought, and it’s ludicrous…

Reporter of unidentified TV station: Traces of the child’s DNA have been found in a car rented by the parents…

Voice of unidentified reporter: …reports of blood and hair samples…

VO: For months the Portuguese police and the McCanns have been waiting for the final results from DNA samples that were collected from their rental car, a Renault Scenic.

Jon Corner (JC): What’s ironic here is that when the Renault was, was taken away to be forensically tested and Kate and Gerry were massively optimistic, they thought ‘oh they might… they must have a clue, they must have a lead’.

VO: Family friend Jon Corner knows that car well…

Kate McCann: “Hi, Jon...”

VO: …he filmed the McCanns driving it when they were still in Portugal.

JC: That’s the vehicle that’s been used to not only move the kids around from place to place but also to get… get out to the airport to pick up family and friends. You’ve got a vehicle that’s clocked a lot of miles.

VO: Once their transportation, the McCann’s rental car has reportedly become a key part of the case against them. Numerous press accounts claim Madeleine’s DNA and fluid from a corpse were found in the back of the car. And what makes it so confusing is the fact the car was rented 25 days after Madeleine vanished.

PVS: There’s one theory that Kate and Gerry rented a car, drove to a place where they had stored Maddie’s body, either in a refrigerator or in a shallow grave, took her somewhere else and disposed of her. 

“...either in a refrigerator...”

“...or in a shallow grave...”

Susan Healy (SH): This is the daughter that Kate and Gerry waited years for, that Kate and Gerry idolised and that Kate and Gerry would have laid down their own lives for, it’s absolutely bizarre… I mean there’s no way that’s happened, there’s no way…

PVS: Are they worried that evidence has been planted?

SH: I worry that evidence has been planted.

VO: Independent DNA experts say that testing should have been completed long ago but police sources have told 48 Hours that the DNA is inconclusive and will not solve this case.

JM: If there was strong DNA evidence, strong forensic evidence, somebody would have been charged and… they would’ve gone to court with it. They don’t have it, is my opinion, if they had it, it would’ve come out.

SH: All I know is that Kate and Gerry tell me all the time ‘mum, there’s nothing that can come back’, everything, they say, can be explained by other means.

VO: Joe Moura agrees.

JM: Whatever they are as parents, whatever they are as human beings, they’re not killers of their daughter.

PVS: Based on your investigation, the real time spent at that resort, talking to the real people who work there and observed the McCanns, what is the truth?

JM: The child was abducted. It was the perfect situation, a solid routine by the parents, and an apartment that was not locked. Easy access, easy access… gone.

*****

Joe Moura is clearly an abduction apologist.

By saying he contradicts the checking he’s simply “expanding” the negligence widening the opportunity for abduction. The bigger the negligence the easier the abduction.

What Moura fails to point out is why they broke their “solid routine” that night. Because he says there was only one check that night, even then only possibly because the way to the apartments is the same way it is to the toilets, whilst on the others he seems to say the checking was regular: “It’s a situation, there’s a pattern, there’s a habit, they did it once, they did it twice, there was no problem, they checked on their own children, again no problems, guess what, on the sixth night there was a problem.”

It is, he says, by observing this pattern, this habit that the abductor knows he can abduct. But on the night in question, they decided, for some strange reason, to break this habit and in favour of allowing the abduction!

And if he says there was no checking, then he cannot associate “they checked on their own children” with a pattern, a habit. They either checked and there was that pattern, or they didn’t and there was no pattern.

But what we find interesting is that no one is calling him out on this. And no one is criticising Mark Saunokonoko for giving this individual visibility and credibility. Why?

With this are we criticising Mark Saunokonoko and his podcasts?

Upfront, we have shown time and time again that we have no sacred cows in this case, so if we thought we had to criticise him and his podcasts we would.

But to be clear, we are criticising this particular podcast but only the part that refers to Joe Moura. The rest we have no problems with.

We have previously pointed out that by inviting certain people we think Mark Saunokonoko risks damaging his credibility and that of his podcasts.

For example, one such individual is Colin ‘the ex-Metropolitan Police officer said there is no evidence the couple or their friends had anything to do with Madeleine’s disappearance’ Sutton. However, all Sutton has said in the podcasts we agree with. We agree that there should be a reconstruction done by the PJ and we must say that all we have read about him having said about forensics, we also agree.

We have mentioned Duarte ‘24 photos’ Levy, but besides the one report he speaks of that needs to be clarified, we have nothing to say against his participation.

We also don’t have anything to say against the participation of death before 3 apologist, Peter McLeod. He didn’t say anything promoting that absurd theory and what he has said in the podcasts up to now is truthful and factual.

And we have to praise Mar Saunokonoko’s work on Mark Perlin and forensics. So much so that we are keeping our reservations on the issue to ourselves because we think pursuing and pressuring authorities with Dr Perlin’s offer can only help out the truth.

But we have to criticise and we have to criticise it on the strongest terms possible the participation of Joseph ‘the child was abducted’ Moura. This is unacceptable and let’s hope that it is an isolated occurrence.

We will continue to follow Mark Saunokonoko’s podcasts with the same attention and independence we have done up to now.

However, we must confess that this worries us:

Searching Mark Saunokonoko’s twitter timeline, we have seen no other contacts between these 2 individuals so we are indeed curious as to where and when the first offer for this interview was made.

Unless the “Michael” Mark Saunokonoko is referring to in the tweet above is Michael Wright and the offer for the interview was made on Feb 5 this year:

That would be the Michael Wright who was a witness for the McCanns during the Lisbon trial:

Is Mark Saunokonoko making a connection between Michael Wright and Killa Dog? If so, why?

In the next post, we will scrutinise what Mr Moura has said in the 48 Hour documentary.