Sunday, 6 September 2015

Goncalo Amaral, an appealing situation.

On the 3rd of September 2015, we finally got the news we'd been waiting for, Goncalo Amaral, the coordinator of the original investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, was granted permission to appeal the damages ruling that resulted in the banning of his book, The Truth of The Lie, the banning of the documentary of the same title, and the decision to award Kate and Gerry McCann 250,000 euros each.

Click here to read, The Truth of The Lie, English translation.

Click here to watch, The Truth of The Lie, full documentary.

Courtesy of

When news of the original decision broke on the 28th April 2015, the McCanns were said to be "delighted". Of course they would be, Kate McCann has made no secret of her hatred for Goncalo Amaral, the man who, despite Kate's best efforts to the contrary, tried to solve the case of her missing daughter. When speaking of Goncalo, she said "he deserves to be miserable and feel fear". 

I wonder if Kate and Gerry will be delighted at the news of the appeal though? Their loopy supporters frothed at the mouth when news of the fund, set up by Leanne Baulch to assist Goncalo with his legal fees, broke. As is par for the course for the more sinister of the pros, a dirty tricks campaign started, with the sole intention of stopping the fund, and attempting to stop the legal process. Of course the pros would never publicly state that an appeal is the last thing they would want for their child abusing idols, but it is.

On the 9th of September 2009, the McCanns succeeded in their bid to have Goncalo Amaral's book, The Truth of The Lie, banned from sale. Gerry McCann released the following statement:

 "I'd like to read this statement on behalf of Kate, myself and our three children:

We're pleased with the judges decision today preventing further distribution and sale of Mr Amaral's book and DVD, 'The Truth of the Lie'.

Mr Amaral's central thesis has no evidence whatsoever to support it.

To claim, as he did, that Madeleine is dead and that we, her parents, were somehow involved in her disappearance has caused our family incredible distress and continues to do so.

Without doubt Madeleine will have suffered as a result of the negative effect this book and DVD will have had on the search for her.  

Sean and Amelie need protection too, from such awful claims.

Hopefully this injunction today will go a long way towards reducing further unnecessary and unjust distress to us all and allow people to concentrate completely on what is important; finding Madeleine.
Thank you."

Gerry and Kate's happiness was short lived though. Goncalo Amaral appealed the decision, and on the 19th of October 2010, duly won. The following is a report from The Guardian dated Tuesday 19th October 2010:

Kate and Gerry McCann, the parents of missing Madeleine, suffered a setback today in their legal battle with a Portuguese police officer when a Lisbon appeal court overturned a ban on his book about the case.
The book by former police detective Gonçalo Amaral, who led the Madeleine investigation in the first five months after the three-year-old's disappearance, can now go back on sale.
In September last year the McCanns obtained the ban on Amaral's book Maddie – The Truth about the Lie, in which he claims they were involved in the toddler's disappearance.
Amaral claims Madeleine died accidentally in the Algarve holiday apartment at Praia da Luz, where she was first reported missing in October 2007, and that her parents fabricated the abduction story. The McCanns, who have never ceased in their search for the missing girl, are suing him for defamation.
Portugal's attorney general, having reviewed the investigation, has ruled there is no evidence to suggest that the McCanns are anything other than entirely innocent.
The court said the decision to block sales of the book had broken "a constitutional and universal right: that of opinion and freedom of expression."
"The contents of the book do not breach the basic rights of the plaintiffs," the court said, according to the Jornal de Noticías newspaper's website.
"The book is an exercise in freedom of speech," Amaral told Portugal's Lusa news agency. "Portuguese democracy has won, as banning the book was unconstitutional."
A spokesman for the McCann family said the decision did not stop the defamation case. "The defamation action against Mr Amaral is very much continuing," he said. "Kate and Gerry's lawyers are now examining the detail of this latest ruling and are considering an appeal."

With the latest appeal now looming, Kate and Gerry must be sweating over what the result may be. The Appellate (appeal) court, concluded their previous findings in the following report, with thanks to Astro for the translation, and taken with thanks from McCannfiles:

"We conclude that the applicants voluntarily decided to limit their right to the intimacy of private life, certainly envisaging higher values like the discovery of their daughter Madeleine's whereabouts, but upon voluntarily limiting that right, they opened the doors for other people to give their opinion about the case, in synchrony with what they were saying, but also possibly in contradiction with their directions, yet always within the bounds of a legitimate and constitutionally consecrated right to opinion and freedom of expression of thought.

We do not see that the right of the book's author, the defendant, can be limited by a right to the reservation of intimacy that suffered voluntary limitations by their holders, the applicants. 

In the same way, concerning the applicants' right to image and a good name: upon placing the case in the public square and giving it worldwide notoriety, the applicants opened all doors to all opinions, even those that are adversarial to them. 

In any case, we understand that the allegation of facts that are profusely contained in the judicial inquiry and that were even published through an initiative of the Republic's Attorney General’s Office, can in no way be seen as an offence against the right to image and a good name of the subjects in the process.

Finally, concerning the damage to the right to usufruct ['Usufruct' is the legal right to use and derive profit or benefit from property that belongs to another person] from the penal process' guarantees, namely the right to a fair investigation and the right to freedom and safety, we still cannot understand how it is possible for said rights to be offended by the contents of a book that describes facts from the investigation, although it parts from the interpretation that the Public Ministry's Magistrates made of those facts, yet offering based, solidly built and logical interpretations.

We thus reach a point where it seems to be important to stress the following: the indicative facts that led to the applicants' constitution as arguidos within the inquiry were later on not valued by the Public Ministry's Magistrates in order to lead to a criminal accusation, but those very same facts, seen through another prism and with another base, may lead to a different conclusion from that which was attained by those same Magistrates – those are indications that were deemed to be insufficient in terms of evidence in a criminal investigation, but they can be appreciated in a different way, in an interpretation that is legitimate to be published as a literary work, as long as said interpretation does not offend any fundamental rights of anyone involved – and we have written above already why we understand that said interpretation does not offend the applicants' rights.

In a concise manner:

The book at stake in this process – "Maddie – the Truth of the Lie" – which was written by the defendant Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, has the main motivation of defending his personal and professional honour, as the author points out right away in the preface and throughout his text.

The contents of the book does not offend any of the applicants' fundamental rights.

The exercise of its writing and publication is included in the constitutional rights that are secured to everyone by the European Convention on Human Rights and by the Portuguese Republic’s Constitution, namely in its articles 37º and 38º.

As we arrive at this point, we conclude that the decision that was made by the Court a quo must be revoked, and the analysis of the other issues that are placed under appeal are not justified, as they are considered prejudiced.

The appeal by defendant Dr. Gonçalo Amaral is sustained.

The other appeals are not taken into consideration, as it is understood that their appreciation is prejudiced – article 660º, no 2, of the Civil Process Code.

III – Decision

In harmony with what is written above, under the terms of the cited dispositions, the Judges at this Appeals Court declare the validity of the appeal filed by defendant Dr. Gonçalo Amaral, and the sentence of the Court a quo is revoked, its disposition replaced by the following:

The injunction is deemed not valid because it was not proved.

Furthermore we deliberate that we do not acknowledge the rest of the appeals.

Costs to be paid by the appellants*.

Lisbon and Appeals Court, 14.10.2010

The Appellate Court Judges,

Francisco Bruto da Costa
Catarina Arelo Manso
António Valente

*On an appeal, the party who must respond to an appeal by the losing party is called 'appellant' in the appeals court."

So despite the pros claiming that the McCanns will beat Goncalo Amaral in the appeal courts, the history books tell a totally different story. Is the appeal court really going to contradict the findings of the three judges named above? You wouldn't bet your last quid on it would you. Fact is, the McCanns got very lucky with the ruling earlier this year. I do hope they didn't have the cash earmarked for anything in particular, mortgage repayments, a European tour, some pampas grass for Pam Gurney perhaps, because from where I'm sitting, I can't see them getting a penny. A view clearly shared by the pros, who did their level best to shut down the fund, and attack the person who started it. I wonder what prompted that............

Thursday, 3 September 2015


Is it too much to ask, I mean really too much to ask, that I might sit down one day, open a newspaper, read it front to back (it's more hygienic that way), and say to myself, "toast my chestnuts on an open fire, that was a damn good, factual read".

As a newspaper editor, Lloyd Embley, editor of The Daily Mirror, has within his grasp, the opportunity to make a difference in the world. You would imagine that with such a role, his greatest ambition would be to expose child abuse, or oversee the exposure of man's inhumanity to man.

So, in his own words, what was Lloyd Embley's proudest moment of 2014?

"Firstly, the jaw-dropping exclusive Sunday Mirror interview with former boxing promoter Frank Maloney, revealing that he was now known as Kellie and was undergoing gender reassignment."

Week after week, we have seen Lloyd Embley and his ilk support Kate and Gerry McCann, with either old stories, twisted stories, stories from unattributable sources, or just unadulterated lies.

Take yesterday's article for instance; click here to read, as well as the usual twaddle The Daily Mirror touch upon Euclides Monteiro, a former employee of the Ocean Club where Madeleine stayed. The Mirror states that Monteiro's widow, Luisa Rodrigues:

"insisted he was an innocent man and has been fighting to get authorities to confirm they have now ruled him out as a suspect."

They go on to say that:
"Scotland Yard, tasked with investigating Madeleine’s disappearance after Madeleine’s family made a personal plea to David Cameron in 2011, have come to focus on the theory she was killed during a bungled burglary."

Once again, it would appear that Embley, perhaps whilst busy scouring the land for his defining moment of 2015, is blissfully unaware of the editors' code of practice:

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.

ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published. In cases involving the Commission, prominence should be agreed with the PCC in advance.

iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

That's pretty straight forward. I wonder if Embley might take the time to explain how his oily rag continually breaches this code by printing, "totally inaccurate, misleading or distorted information" with regards to the case of missing Madeleine McCann. Most men carry their car keys and wallet in their pockets, seems to me a certain Clarence "cash for lies" Mitchell, carries Embley in his.

Firstly, Euclides Monteiro was ruled out of any involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, not once, but twice. After his death in 2009, an autopsy was performed upon Monteiro, and his DNA taken, this DNA was cross referenced against that found in apartment 5a, and other crimes within the Algarve, that had no evidential connection to the disappearance of Madeleine, not only was that DNA proven to not match any recovered from 5a, it was also ruled out from any other crime. In short, Euclides Monteiro was an innocent man, something The Daily Mirror failed to mention.

Hardly surprising when you compare the efit of Scotland Yard's number one suspect, with that of Euclides Monteiro. (Monteiro is the one who doesn't look like Gerry McCann)

Of course theses facts don't stop the Daily Mirror from deliberately misleading the reader. At best Embley only cares about selling papers, and as long as the McCanns are ok, anybody else, including dead people, matter not.

Moving on swiftly to the second totally misleading piece of misinformation, and The Mirror's claim that Scotland Yard have come to focus on the theory that Madeleine was killed during a bungled burglary. That statement is complete conjecture, The Daily Mirror have no idea what the focus of the investigation is. Many leads are being followed up, so to claim that one is the focus over others is blatant misinformation. I have ask myself why The Mirror have chosen now to suggest Madeleine is dead. They've ignored the fact the dogs alerted to all things McCann for years, why say she was killed now? Kate and Gerry will not be pleased, still I'm sure you'll clear up that in your next thrilling episode of: "The Daily Mirror talks bollocks" won't you Embley, you fucking yes man.

Saturday, 22 August 2015

The sociopathic traits of Gerry McCann


  1. a person with a personality disorder manifesting itself in extreme antisocial attitudes and behaviour.

One of the questions that poses itself for anybody who has studied the McCann case, or indeed for the casual observer, is this; could one or both of the McCanns have a severe mental disorder? 
A sociopath possesses  the ability to withdraw emotion and conscience from situations that may present themselves to them, especially when those characteristic traits hinder their ability to cope with a problem. 

  1. For instance, imagine a computer game, a shoot em up, if you will. You the player, wander the streets, armed to the teeth with weapons and shoot anything that comes your way. That is the aim of the game, and you do it because you must to win. You have no feelings for the characters you blast your way past, why would you, they're not real, you just do it because it's a game. For the sociopath, it is much the same, life presents them with a mission, a goal, or a need, and whilst they might not kill anyone in the process, the lack of conscience gives them the ability to calmly succeed without thought for right or wrong, only the desire to win.

    In Gerry McCann, we see a man who plays out the case of his missing daughter as if it were a game. He appears to thrive from the thrill of the chase, and it is that chase that makes his sociopathic traits manifest to the surface. Whereas you or I would panic if in the situation of the McCanns, Gerry does not, he is calm, he is alert, he is calculating, his mind working at high speed, reading the situation with the guile of a predator, all powerful, in control of everyone, and everything around him. He feels that he is the centre of attention, his personality absorbent of his own deceptiveness, and his self belief grows with every calculated scheme.

    Take the following scenario, it is a theory that has been put about by many as to what happened to Madeleine McCann:

    The McCanns sedated their children, so that they could enjoy nights out without the worry of them waking up. It isn't an implausible theory, Kate McCann after all, is a qualified anaesthetist, she would have a professional expertise on various sedatives, dosages, and be more than competent in the administration of them. It is a known fact that Madeleine, as is quite normal for a three year old, had history for waking during the night, as her reward chart shows. 

  2. If we are to believe that the children were left, then how could the McCanns be sure Madeleine would not wake, wander off, (she had done before). She could have encountered many household hazards in a dark, unfamiliar apartment. Kate described in her book, and to the press how "we had always suspected all three children had been sedated" yet it took her 4 months to have them tested. Now, with Gerry's cardiological background, and Kate's expertise, it is completely illogical that either parent would take 4 months to have their children tested, knowing the fatal consequences that could arise  from a qualified professional giving children sedatives, let alone a stranger. Curiously, Kate had this to say of the eventual test results:

    "Whilst this didn't totally exclude the possibility that the children had been sedated, especially given the time that had elapsed, it meant that nobody else (including the PJ and the media) could prove otherwise"

    There are grounds to believe the children had all been sedated, not by an abductor, but by Kate or Gerry McCann, and so back to our scenario. The children were sedated, Madeleine has an adverse reaction to the drug she was given, and either wakes feeling unwell, gets out of bed and has a fall, or dies during her sleep, and is found by her parents. It would certainly explain the cadaver odour on Kate McCann's clothes, and could even explain the crying heard by Mrs Fenn. As harsh as it sounds, and it does, Madeleine is dead, neither parent can change that fact, a decision must be made. This is where the sociopath would take over. With no regard for human decency, a sociopath would enter the realms of damage limitation, or self preservation if you like. An autopsy is out of the question, thus alerting the authorities is out of the question. Too much would be at stake, neither doctor would work again, one, or both would certainly face manslaughter charges, which would undoubtedly result in a jail term, and both of the twins would be taken from the couple. With that in mind, is it inconceivable that Gerry took over, hatched a plan to dispose of Madeleine's body, and protect what is left of his family? I think not.

  3. There is clear evidence, that suggests Gerry segregated the loss of Madeleine to concentrate on saving the family unit. Time and time again, we see Gerry refer to Madeleine as "the child", it is a classic case of disassociation. By calling Madeleine "the child", she is no longer his daughter, but an object, eg. the bus, the tree, the fridge, the emotional connection is removed, therefore making the situation more playable, remember this is a game now, there is no room for sentiment, not for the sociopath.

  4. A sociopath has the burning need to control situations, to control the characters within the game, again this is evident with the power Gerry holds over Kate. Kate has aged drastically over the years, she does not possess the same ability to place guilt or emotion into a box, thus dealing with self preservation as easily. Take for example the 48 questions Kate McCann refused to answer. We are told this was upon the advice of the McCanns' lawyer, yet Gerry chose to answer his questions. Of course he was always going to, the need for controlling the situation would mean that keeping silent, simply wasn't an option. Keeping Kate silent, on the other hand, was the only option. It was during Gerry's interview, that we see yet more evidence of displacement, when shown the evidence of the dogs alerting to all things McCann, Gerry wouldn't even look at the screen. Almost childlike tendencies, "If I can't see it, it isn't happening, and therefore it can't hurt me" again, removing the reality, the risk of emotion, from the set plan, the self preservation. Gerry had to be in control. Whilst waiting at the police station, and about to negotiate, with a man who claimed to have Madeleine, Gerry was said to be sat, calmly sucking on a lollipop, watching the television, and chatting to an officer about sport, yet again, and I know I keep writing it, he was distancing himself from the situation.

    Time after time we have seen interviews on the television, or videos, where Gerry displays his true nature, he can't help it, whilst he is talking, he is calmness personified, he is in control, the toothy sneer, the arrogance, the smugness, the catch me if you can attitude, but all of that goes out the window the moment Kate speaks. As soon as Kate answers a question, or dares to speak, Gerry's face tightens, a fear washes over his face, he is not in control, and the fact that every word that comes out of Kate's mouth, hasn't passed through the mind of Gerry first, fills him with dread. Take the video below for example, Gerry goes through every trick in the book to correct Kate, he shows disappointment, both facially, and physically, leaving Kate in no doubt, that she hasn't stuck to his script.  

  A sociopath, whilst convinced they are doing the      right thing by a loved one, will ultimately destroy    them. They truly believe that they are making those  closest to them, into better people, for that person's  own good. They will attempt to mould them into  what they believe they should be, but in doing so,  they will leave the other person lifeless, scared and  desolate. Kate's face bears the scars of such  behaviour, it is barren , often lifeless, her eyes  glazed, and devoid of any happiness. Her actions  are no longer her own, as she now finds herself in a  mortal state of purgatory, ruled by her "loving"  husband, whilst tortured with the need to rid herself  of guilt. Something she will never be able to do. 

In contrast, Gerry doesn't seem to have aged at all, he has fed his needs from what he perceives as a game, a game that to he is convinced he is winning, but at what cost? How many have suffered at the hands of Gerry McCann, how many more will suffer? One thing is for sure, one day, one way or another, the games are always over, and when that day comes, Gerry McCann, the man who thought he could control the world, will lose everything. 

Saturday, 1 August 2015

More McCann lies. A crock of locked V unlocked

Philomena McCann, Gerry's sister, said on 04 May: "Some people may ask why they left the children alone in the apartment but it was locked and they had a full view of the front door and they were checking every half hour."

Ok, so the apartment was locked then.

Jill Renwick, a family friend, told GMTV on 04 May: "She's obviously been taken as she couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters had been forced open."

Still locked.

Jon Corner, a friend of the McCanns, and one of the many people who was told the lie of an "abductor" smashing the shutters, said:

"She (Kate) just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, 'They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.'

"They had left the apartment locked while they were having their meal, but when they went back the last time they saw the damage."

You guessed it, still locked.

It was these people, along with others, who were also told tales of "smashed", "jemmied" and "broken" shutters. Before we move on, let's have a look at some of the statements from people who the McCanns lied to, when they said there had been a break in:

Instead of searching for Madeleine, the McCanns were busy lying to all and sundry:

Brian Healy (Kate's father)

"Gerry told me when they went back the shutters to the room were broken, they were jemmied up and she was gone,"

Trish Cameron (Gerry's sister)

"The door was lying open, the window in the bedroom and the shutters had been jemmied open."

"She just blurted out that Madeleine had been abducted. She told me, 'They have broken the shutter on the window and taken my little girl.''

Philomena McCann (Gerry's big sister)

"The shutters were jemmied, the window opened"

Jill Renwick (Kate's friend)

"Madeleine has obviously been taken. She couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters were forced."

"They were just watching the hotel room and going back every half-hour and the shutters had been broken open and they had gone into the room and taken Madeleine,"

Jon Corner (family friend)

"Kate said the shutters of the room were smashed."

"She just told me that Maddy (sic) had been abducted, that the shutters of the apartment had been forced and someone had taken her."

Daily Mail

"When Mrs McCann checked on the children, she found the apartment door wide open, the window shutters jemmied wide and her daughter's bed empty."So as things on the night of the 3rd, we have reports of a locked apartment, parents out, smashed shutters, and a missing child. 

^^^^That's an abduction right there^^^^

Only that isn't the truth is it. The truth is, there were no signs of a break in, despite the McCanns best efforts to convince the world otherwise, and the truth came out almost as quickly as it was hidden:

Daily Mail

"The parents, who were taken to the PJ in Portimão at around mid-morning, refused to speak to the journalists, but advanced the idea that the apartment had been broken into, to the British media. Nevertheless, the resort's administration and the GNR assert that "there were no signs of a break-in whatsoever"

Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa, spokesman for the investigation, has confided in British former Chief Inspector Albert Kirby that neither the windows nor their shutters had been tampered with.

Albert Kirby

"I had a very interesting chat with the officer in charge. The window shutters are not an issue."

Confirming this, 
John Hill (resort manager) said that there was:

"no sign of a break in whatsoever"

Even the McCann's very own spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, finally conceded that:

“There was no evidence of a break-in"

This amazing U turn was covered in many newspapers:

Irish Independent

"Interestingly, Clarence Mitchell's statement about the McCanns reversal of their 'break in' story, came one week after Dispatches aired the documentary 'Searching For Madeleine' on 18 October 2007. In that documentary, it was effectively proved that there was no way anybody could break into the apartment and leave no forensic trace or damage to the lightweight aluminium shutters, which are covered with a fine coating of polyurethane paint which marks extremely easily."

So how did an "abductor" get into a locked apartment, take Madeleine from her bed, and make off into the night, without leaving a trace?

Think Gerry, think. What you gonna do now, you're screwed. Abductors don't walk through walls.........

Taken from Gerry McCann's statement, the day after he and Kate spent the night telling lies, whilst others searched for their daughter.

Click here to read Gerry McCann's statement 04/05/2007

"the witness, (Gerry) came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked"

What's that? Say that again.........

"the witness, (Gerry) came to the Club, entered the room using his respective key, the door being locked"

but I thought it was unlocked?

Well this is most peculiar. <scratches head>

Let's get this straight, first the apartment was locked, the shutters smashed, and Madeleine taken.

The next day, the shutters were fine, the patio door had been left unlocked.

Despite this patio door being unlocked, Gerry states, that both he and Kate used their key to gain access to the apartment via the front door. Here's where things get a bit odd. Check this diagram out:

The black line, denotes the route from the Tapas bar to the patio door Gerry says they left unlocked. The red line, the route to the locked door, Gerry claims he and Kate used to check on Madeleine (we will see Kate's version of events differ completely later). It beggars belief that the couple would take a route twice the distance to enter the apartment, through a locked door, when the unlocked one was much closer.

Now, over the years we've heard the excuse that the patio door was left open in case of fire. Are we really supposed to believe that if a fire was to break out, Madeleine, a 3 year old little girl, would battle through the blaze, a sibling slung over either shoulder, make her way to the unlocked patio door, and save the day? Let's say that would be possible, that Madeleine could indeed do that. Why then was Kate so sure, that Madeleine hadn't simply wandered off? How was it she was convinced straight away that "They've taken her",

Let's look at Kate's first statement now. You'll remember how Gerry said that both he and Kate used the locked, front door to gain access to the apartment. Kate however, tells a different story, she states that she actually used the unlocked patio door. The following is taken from Kate McCann's statement:

"At around 10pm, the interviewee went to check on the children. She went into the apartment by the side door, which was closed but not locked, as she said before. She noticed that the door to her children's bedroom was completely open, the window was also open, the shutters raised and the curtains open, while she was certain of having closed them all as she always did."

Statement of Kate McCann 04/05/2007

Wouldn't you think that Kate and Gerry would have known exactly which doors each other used, especially the one used for the final check?

Would it not be something you would both discuss over and over, as you desperately tried to ascertain what happened that night?

Perhaps had they not both spent the night lying to friends and family, about a fully locked apartment, and smashed shutters, (whilst not searching for their missing daughter) they might have perfected their plan B story sooner.

I will leave you to sit back and watch this video, yet another version of events, and perhaps the most ludicrous thing I have ever witnessed.


Friday, 17 July 2015

Rule number one. Never let the truth get in the way of protecting the McCanns........

To my mind pro McCanns fall into different categories.

There are those who rightly or wrongly believe the McCanns to be innocent, and will quote facts to back up their claims. I have no issue with that.

Then there are those who are friends with the McCanns or their family, and yes some of these people are active on facebook and twitter, some are probably decent people away from the keyboard, some are most certainly not.

We have a minority, within the minority that call themselves pros, but are actually nothing more than sad lonely individuals who jump from case to case with the sole intention of "trolling". I hate that term, it is far too readily thrown around for the sake of it. The press love to use it to describe anybody who asks questions, as we all too well know.

Then of course we have the extremely stupid, I'm not talking leaving your bath running here, I'm talking eating crayons because colourful stuff looks appetising. I'm talking about those who are so innately lacking in brain power that no matter how many times you show them a link to disprove what they are saying, they won't have it, and in barely legible writing will tell you that it is you who is thick. Basically we're talking about the likes of Alfibab3 (from twitter) whose real name is Wendy Grandfield.

So that leaves us with one other type of pro, now this type of pro is extremely worrying. For those of you on twitter, you may have come across a tweeter who goes by the name of Safari Sara, and boy is Sara a weird un. Sara loves to claim she is debunking the evidence of the dogs, and also claims to discredit Amaral. Now the two ways she does this is to use the Haut de la Garenne child abuse investigation in Jersey in 2008, and the investigation into the horrendous murder of 8 year old Joana Cipriano, which Goncalo headed in 2004.

Firstly let's look briefly at the background of HDLG, how Eddie, the human cadaver and human blood dog was deployed, what he found, then how the disturbed mind of Sara makes out that nothing untoward happened there, and goes onto claim Eddie's alerts were false.

HDLG was opened in 1867 with the purpose of being a school for neglected children, it went on to serve a few purposes, but it's main use was as a childrens home, until in 1986 the home closed. After the home's closure it was used for a short period as a temporary respite centre for children with special needs. When you think of the number of vulnerable children that passed through the building's doors, and knowing what we now know went on there, it sends shivers down your spine. Most of us, thankfully, can only imagine the horrific happenings that took place, and what it must be like to be scared and alone, with no one to trust, no family to help you, and abused at the hands of those who are supposed to be your saviours.

In February 2008 a police investigation started on site at the home, this investigation was brought about after allegations of the abuse, and murder of children at the home. Eddie, the dog widely regarded as the best in the world, and who had also, the year previous worked on the Madeleine McCann case, was brought in with his trainer, Martin Grime. Below is a link, filmed by the Homicide Search Advisor of the National Policing Improvement Agency, present with him at the time was former Deputy Chief Police Officer Mr. Lenny Harper:

As you will hear from the start of the video, Mr Harper was in no way confident as to Eddie's abilities, not least of all because of the bad press Eddie had received at the hands of pro McCann claims after his findings in 2007. That opinion was soon to change, as you can see by the report he made to accompany the video below, take note at some of the amazing tests that Eddie passed with flying colours Mr Harper describes at the start of his report. JAR/6 is a fragment of a child's skull:

00.00.0 Getting ready. I was reluctant to let the dog inside as I did not feel that it would do much good. In truth, I was a little sceptical – I had not felt a favourable impression from the handler (Martin Grimes (sic)) at our initial meeting and I was dubious, although my opinion of his qualities and integrity was to markedly change as events unfolded. I began to realise as I worked closely with him over a period of months that what I originally took as arrogance was simply supreme confidence in the ability of his dogs in the face of jealous, empire protecting rivals who were not as professionally capable. Throughout the investigation, we subjected Martin and his dogs to many ‘verifying’ tests, from burying swabs in sand (which he always found no matter how large an area), to minute blood stains. The dogs never failed. Many of these tests were carried out in front of Jersey politicians and media, including Channel Television and Diane Simon of the JEP. Frank Walker and Andrew Lewis were only two of the politicians who witnessed the ability of the dogs in hugely impressive displays. Funny how they all forgot this when they jumped on the bandwagon which sought to ruin Martin Grime’s reputation. One of the most spectacular exercises occurred when one of the Anthropologists brought a vial of sand back that she had removed from the tomb of a mummy in Egypt. We put this vial on a beach, below the sand, and let Eddie off to look for it. The dog amazingly sought it out in a few minutes and gave us the reaction you will see in this video. To get back to the start of the video and my initial doubts, after a few days outside I had at least gained a grudging respect for Martin’s hard work and dedication. I still was not keen to extend the search inside the house with the dog; however, I reluctantly conceded that we should look at all our possibilities so that we could walk away and say that we had given it a good shot. You can see me standing looking less than confident.

00.00.45 The first indication that the dog (Eddie) is finding something amiss. His behaviour has changed, and is remarked on by the handler. He is initially reacting further down from where we were to eventually find the initial fragment, (which ILM and others still incorrectly claim to be definitively identified as coconut) and in the flow of the drainage from the area where it was found. To clarify, Eddie is trained to trace the scent of dead human flesh. He will react where this scent is found, not necessarily where it was originally located. His strongest reaction will normally be where that scent is strongest, which will usually be where the dead flesh has lain longest, but he will sense it in areas where the scent has been carried, for instance, by drains.

00.01.08 Eddie is starting to react strongly now. Although still some yards from the finding of JAR/6, he smells something which has been carried down in the drainage from the original source. We were later to find that the drain ran down from where we found JAR/6 and where the bones were found by the builders, who suspected that they were also the bones of juveniles. One of them identified a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. These bones were found with children’s’ shoes which were to be later the source of interesting conflicts between the evidence of the pathologists and the staff at the Jersey Museum.

00.01.50 The doors and wall where Eddie is reacting so strongly now lead into the room where the top wall adjoins the stair area where JAR/6 (the infamous initial fragment) was found. Note the change in the dog’s behaviour, and the strong indication from his that there is something to be investigated here. It is important to note at this point, that the dog is only telling us that the scent of human death is here. He is not telling us that there has been a murder; he is not telling us that this is the spot where a body has been buried. He is only telling us that the scent of human death is at this spot. He is saying, “There is something here for you to investigate.” It is worthy of note, that this is also next to the location where builders found the bones which they thought were human juveniles, and where they were told that if they found bones to let “bygones be bygones.”

00.02.25 Eddie is now at the doors leading to the stairwell where both JAR/6 and the “builders’ bones” were found. Note that he is reacting strongly. To corroborate Eddie’s reaction we used the most up to date geological equipment supplied to us by the British Army and the Metropolitan Police (more services obtained through the use of contacts and a hospitality budget!) for which we paid nothing. These surveys confirmed inconsistencies in the sub floor levels.

00.02.39 Eddie is telling us that there is something we need to investigate on the other side of the door and he wants through to indicate this to us.

00.02.58 Eddie is now reacting very strongly and indicating to us that the scent of dead human flesh is in this location. This is where we were to find JAR/6, which the establishment continue to say was only coconut, but cannot explain how Eddie reacted as he did, nor indeed, how the lab at Oxford found Collagen.

Collagen is not found in coconut or wood, it is only present in mammals, which would seem to destroy the claims of the Jersey establishment, aided and abetted by the Jersey Evening Post and Channel Television, that JAR/6 is coconut or wood. Again, it is worthy of recall, that the builders who found the bones at this location thought they were human, and that one of them actually identified a bone as that of a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. Additionally, the police officer who was called to the scene was also dubious of the bones’ origins, as was the female pathologist who attended. She “did not like” the situation and referred the matter to her boss who said the bones where not consistent with being human. However, an Anthropologist later stated that he was incorrect and the measurements he quoted were entirely consistent with the bones being children’s’ pelvic bones as identified by one of the builders. The Anthropologist further stated that the Pathologist was not qualified to make the statement that he had.

00.04.06 Now Eddie has just left the wall adjoining the stair area where he reacted earlier. The drains in the building run from those stairs, under the adjoining wall, and down the room where we are now standing. As the dog is trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, he is now following the strong scent emanating from the other side of the wall and being carried in the drains under the floor of this room and down the room towards the corridor seen earlier in the video.

00.04.15 Note the dog’s return to the wall. This was almost the exact spot where JAR/6 was found. It is a few inches from where the builders found the bones which they thought were human and which they were told about, “Let bygones be bygones.” If this dog was a waste of money, then how did he lead us to this exact spot? How did he later, in the ‘live’ presence of Wendy Kinnard (the then Home Affairs Minister) and Graham Power (the then Chief Police Officer), lead us to the bones in the cellars which an Anthropologist in the United Kingdom said were “fleshed and fresh” when burnt and buried? It cannot be a co-incidence that this dog, trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, reacted so strongly in an area where we were to find a fragment of substance initially identified by a professional, accomplished, Anthropologist, as a part of a child’s skull, and right beside the spot where builders found bones and children’s shoes which they thought were human bones. No amount of spin by Le Marquand and others can contradict this, and no amount of misinformation from Warcup and Gradwell can conceal this truth.

00.04.41 Eddie still on stairs, right above the location where JAR/6 was found. He comes down again to the exact spot.

00.05.20 Eddie still reacting strongly at the spot where JAR/6 was found.

This is the live video, filmed on a mobile phone as it happened. The film was made by the Homicide Search Advisor of the National Policing Improvement Agency, on his mobile phone. He was to later say that the way we had carried out the search of HDLG was a “shining example” and should be documented as an example of good practice. Where has this recommendation been lost in the mists? The reactions of the dog speak for themselves. Eddie is not telling us that murder was committed at HDLG. He is telling us that somewhere in the floor-space of the premises; the scent of human death has been present. He is telling us that there is something there for us to investigate. His findings have been corroborated by the finding of the bones and teeth, by the results of the surveys carried out by the most sophisticated of electronic geological equipment, and by the evidence of builders and former residents and victims of abuse in HDLG. This video totally contradicts the spin of Frank Walker, Andrew Lewis and Diane Simon of the Jersey Evening Post, all of whom were taken on a tour of the building and given a demonstration of the ability and capability of Eddie and his companion "Keela" the blood detection dog. All of them were aware of the true situation relating to the dog and the finds. All of them, for their own reasons, chose to ignore the truth and to peddle the myths of those seeking to discredit the victims of the horrific abuse within HDLG. They are now, in my opinion, exposed as craven cowards and not fit to lick those victims’ boots. As for Martin Grimes (sic) and the dogs that they have tried to discredit, they are now working full time for one of the best Law Enforcement Agencies in the world in the USA.

So what we have there is a pathologist (a physician who interprets and diagnoses the changes caused by disease in tissues and body fluids) claiming that the bones found weren't human, and an anthropologist (someone who can examine human skeletal remains to determine the identity of unidentified bones.) claiming that the bones were human. Have a guess whose opinion was taken as correct. The pathologist said the findings were coconut shell, and it is this claim that our child abuse apologist, Safari Sara goes along with. The mere fact that a lab in Oxford found collagen, (something that is only present in mammals, NOT coconut) doesn't put Sara off her false claims, Sara doesn't fall into the category of dense as lead like poor Mrs Winch, a draft doesn't WHOOSH through her ears as with Wendy Grandfield. This is the other evidence that was found on the HDLG site:

JAR/30: 3-4; 1940s to 1980s. Two fragments of burnt bone one is fragment of longbone? Tibia. Submitted to University of Sheffield with KSH/158. Origin confirmed as human. Submitted for dating awaiting results.

JAR/33: 3-4; 1940s to 1980’s.
Calcined fragment of bone. ?human.

JAR/53: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
5 fragments of calcined long bone ?human.

JAR/54: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
4 fragments of calcined bone ?human.

JAR/55: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
1 fragment of calcined bone ?human.

JAR/57:183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
2 fragments of bone of unknown origin.

JAR/56: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
1 fragment of bone ?human.

JAR/67: 183. Zone 3 East Cellar 3.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Human Tooth: deciduous left maxillary first molar, age 9 yrs ± 3 yrs. Could have been shed naturally (Anthro exam).
Submitted to odontologist, see report.

JAR/69: 183. Zone 3 East Cellar 3.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragments x 3 of possible human cortical bone.

JAR/61: 183 Zone 4 East Cellar 3.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
23 Fragments of bone:
1 Burnt fragment which closely resembles a human juvenile mastoid process.
2. Burnt fragment of ?human mandible.
3. Fragments of burnt long bone x 3 measuring between 11.3 and 16.3 mm.
4. Fragments of unidentified burnt cortical and trabecular bone x 7.
5. Fragment of slightly burnt long bone measuring 33 mm. The cortex of the
bone resembles human but it is quite thick and the trabeculae can not be seen because it requires cleaning. It appears to have been cut at one end.
6. Fragments of unburnt unidentified long bone. x 3 The appearance and texture of the cortex of the fragments appears more animal than human but it is advised that further examination should be undertaken in order to confirm this.
7. Fragments of unidentified long bone x 7. 5 have been burnt and 2 haven’t. Species
uncertain although two of the burnt fragments could possibly be human

JAR/90: 183 Cellar 3 Zone 3 East.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragments of unidentified bone of unknown species. One which is calcined is possibly human bone.

Cellar 4 Context 169 (redeposited char material from fire elsewhere. Unsealed)

JAR/36: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of bone ?human.

JAR/37: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of burnt bone. ?human mastoid process

JAR/39: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of burnt bone ?human.

JAR/40: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of bone ?human.

GMK/18: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Human tooth. Anthro exam – deciduous left maxillary lateral incisor. Age range 6 yrs ± 2yrs

Sara has been shown the facts many times, yet she still spouts more coconut crap than a bounty production line.


Because it suits her agenda.

What is her agenda?

To back the McCanns, OR to to back ALL child abusers?

Moving on, let's look at the case of Joana Cipriano, now this is another case of extreme child abuse, and Safari Sara uses this one to discredit Goncalo Amaral, she's not alone either, she is supported by that other font of misinformation, the buck toothed fiend Pamela Gurney.

On the 12th September 2004, Joana Cipriano disappeared from the village of Figueira, near Portimão, in the Portuguese region of the Algarve. The investigation by the Portuguese Judiciary Police (Polícia Judiciária - PJ) ended with the conviction for murder of Leonor and João Cipriano, Joana's mother and uncle. The prosecution claimed that Joana was killed because she saw her mother and João Cipriano, her mother's brother, having incestuous sex, in accordance with the testimony of the stepfather of Leandro Silva, the common-law husband of Leonor Cipriano. Leonor Cipriano confessed to killing her daughter. Her uncle confessed to having beaten her up after which she stood "quiet on the floor". He said he cut his niece's body in small pieces, put her in a fridge box, then put her inside an old car that was taken to Spain to be crushed and burned. When he was asked if he had sexually abused his niece he said in the presence of his lawyer "I did not harm her, I only killed her"

Goncalo Amaral was the lead detective in this case, now the impression that Sara and Pamela like to give is that Goncalo and his team beat a confession from Joana's mother Leonor, and that Goncalo played a part in this beating. This lie, as with the above coconut cobblers is lapped up by the pros, some believe it, which no doubt bring Sara and Pam much happiness. The simple facts are as follows:

At the time of Leonor's alleged beating Goncalo Amaral wasn't anywhere near the building.

Leonor Cipriano was given an extra 7 months for lying about being beaten by the PJ.

The only thing Goncalo did was to fill in the paperwork incorrectly regarding Leonor's injuries.

Leonor's injuries couldn't be attributed to anybody, and it was claimed in court by a fellow inmate, that it was prisoners that gave her these injuries.

The only reason Leonor made these claims, was to try and get off on the charge of murdering her own daughter, and feeding her body to pigs, which she did to cover up an incestual affair with her brother, she deserved everything she got.

Do you hear the pros congratulating Amaral and his team for catching these two child killers?

Not a chance, they wouldn't let that get in the way of discrediting Goncalo Amaral, whilst at the same time being apologists for child abusers! As I pointed out at the beginning of this post, pros like Safari Sara, and Pamela Gurney worry me greatly when they knowingly use such slurs to discredit people or facts.

I ask the question again, is their agenda merely to protect their heroes the McCanns, or are we dealing with something far more twisted and sick? As I said, pro McCanns that deal with facts I have no problem with, it is a free country, and thank God it is, but child abuse apologists posing as pro McCanns who knowingly lie, now that is something very sinister and wrong indeed.

Wednesday, 17 June 2015

It's not what you know, it's who, or could it be both?

It's not what you know, it's who.........

We all know the McCanns lie, there are examples of their deceit everywhere. One of the first, and possibly most powerful set of lies they told, were the porkies Kate told to her old friend Jill Renwick.

Jill Renwick is a long standing friend of Kate McCanns, both Kate and Gerry worked with Jill at Glasgow hospital in the 90's. Jill was one of the friends Kate phoned during the early hours of the 4th May 2007, and possibly the most influential. It was through Jill that the lie about an "abductor" gaining entry to apartment 5a having smashed the shutters, manifested across the nation within hours of the parents reporting Madeleine missing. This fabricated story was remember, concocted by Kate and Gerry who sat indoors, whilst scores of volunteers searched throughout the night for a missing 3 year old girl they had never met. 

In an article for the Guardian by Esther Addley, on June 2nd 2007, Jill Renwick discusses her conversation with Kate:

"She just said, 'Help me, please help me'. She said, 'We've been searching all night until 4.30am, and then everybody left us'. At that stage there was only one police officer at the door. They didn't know what to do. So I phoned GMTV."

First line, and it's a lie, Kate did NOT physically search, and Gerry managed an hour, but that's by the by. Good old Jill phoned GMTV, surely GMTV would check that the information Jill gave them was correct, precise, and accurate? Not a hope, what they did was to fail Madeleine, whilst at the same time, helping the McCanns plant the abduction seed. Jill provided more lies to 6.1 million UK viewers:

"They were just watching the hotel room and going back every half-hour."

"Poor Kate and Gerry don't know where to turn. She's obviously been taken as she couldn't have gone out on her own and the shutters had been forced open. The shutters had been broken open and they've gone into the room and taken her."

BANG! In one fell swoop we have 6.1 million people being told that A, there was opportunity for an abduction, and B, there had been a forced entry. Total and utter nonsense, we now know, as did the McCanns, that there was NO forced entry, but there it was, out in the public arena. 

Support began to gather pace. Think about it, of those 6.1 million viewers, how many of them went into work that week, spoke to friends and told them; 

"hey did you hear on the news today? An intruder broke into an apartment in Portugal and snatched a little girl" 

The lie grew legs and multiplied, the press reported it as fact, and before the week was out the Mcanns had a nation behind them, in fact they had so much support based upon lies that when the Official Find Madeleine website was set up on the 10th May 2007 it received 75 million hits in the first 48 hours, and all due to one phone call. Pretty impressive stuff eh, but that's the way the media work. Being the first with the stories is more important than being the first with the facts. As we know facts are something that the Official Find Madeleine website is seriously lacking in.

So the McCanns owe their friend Jill a huge debt of thanks, but her influence on this case didn't stop there, far from it.

The high level of support might not be as much of a mystery as people think. Renwick, possibly with perfectly good intentions, and without knowing she was being used as a pawn in the McCann's scheme, rallied more support, in the form of Gordon Brown. Jill lived on the same street as Gordon's brother, John Brown. The following quote could explain just how the future Prime Minister came to be so involved:

"I stopped him in the street the day afterwards and said, 'These are my friends. Do you think you could speak to Gordon about it?' And he said of course."
As we know Gordon Brown took up the post of Prime Minister at the end of June 2007, in September that year his head of media monitoring, Clarence Eden Mitchell, resigned from his reported £75,000 a year cabinet office job to work as PR consultant for the McCanns. A bold move indeed if he truly believed that Madeleine could be found any day. Much has been said about the influence Gordon Brown had upon the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine Mccann. Certainly the political intervention in this case was something the like of which had never been seen before. 

In her diary, Kate McCann wrote:

"WEDNESDAY, MAY 23: Gordon Brown (then Chancellor and PM in waiting) called and spoke with Gerry -very kind and giving encouragement.
Feeling a bit emotional afterwards."

On the 27th May 2007, and with the original source being the Guardian, Brendan de Beer wrote:

"Gordon Brown has personally intervened in the search for missing four-year-old Madeleine McCann after her parents became frustrated by the lack of progress in the police investigation.
After a series of telephone conversations with Madeleine's father, Gerry McCann, in recent days, the Chancellor requested assistance from the Foreign Office and the Home Office. He asked that pressure be brought to bear on the Portuguese authorities to allow more information about the inquiry to be made public.

Gerry and his wife, Kate, have been desperate for a description of a man seen carrying what appears to have been a child on 3 May to be made public, but Portuguese police refused for three weeks because of the country's laws, which forbid the details of an investigation being released.
The Observer understands that Brown gave the McCanns an assurance he would do 'anything he can' to help. The British embassy duly applied pressure on the Portuguese authorities to find more flexibility in their secrecy laws. British ambassador John Buck visited the Algarve last Thursday. A day later Portuguese police made a U-turn and issued a detailed description of the man, said to be white, 35 to 40, 5ft 10in and of medium build, with hair longer around the neck, wearing a dark jacket, light beige trousers and dark shoes.

Asked whether Brown had influenced the decision, Clarence Mitchell, a Foreign Office spokesman for the McCann family in the Algarve, said: 'Draw your own conclusions.' He said in a statement: 'I can confirm that telephone conversations have taken place between Gerry McCann and Chancellor Gordon Brown. During them, Mr Brown offered both Gerry and Kate his full support in their efforts to find Madeleine, although details of the conversations will remain private.''

This efit was of course the man Jane Tanner saw, that sighting eventually amounted to nothing. I find it very strange the McCanns didn't push the Smith sighting with such vigour, but then from all of Tanner's many descriptions, none looked like Gerry.

We're not done, Renwick's sister called a friend she had in CID, and another contact was made, the former Defence Secretary, Des Browne. 

Can you see how this charade snowballed?

Two lies, made by Kate McCann, convinced a nation of their innocence within the space of three media frenzied days, and these bastards had a nerve to sue others! 

So whilst we're all considering theories as to why the McCanns have got away with so much, and the pros bleat like sheep claiming "The McCanns were just an ordinary couple like any other who didn't have friends in high places", let's not forget that they only needed one friend, Jill Renwick. As the old saying goes, it's not what you know, it's who............

Or could it be both?
Let's rewind, to a time before Madeleine was taken. a time when Gerry McCann was already linking himself to some pretty high profile figures, figures that would rush to his side like a fly to the proverbial.

Gerry McCann was a member of a sub committee as a medical advisor for an 'independent' investigative organisation known as COMARE, or to give it it's full descriptive title, Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment.

The committee's role is described on their website as this:

COMARE is a Department of Health expert committee, but it provides independent advice to all government departments and agencies.

With the terms of reference being:

To assess and advise government and the devolved authorities on the health effects of natural and man-made radiation and to assess the adequacy of the available data and the need for further research.

Basically the committee, which was made up of medical experts and scientists, were asked by the Labour Government, to investigate and advise as to the dangers and risks of radiation given off by power stations, pylons, and medical equipment such as CAT scanners.

Now let's have a look at some of the names surrounding the issues COMARE were investigating, and how they are linked to Kate and Gerry, starting with..........well I'll be jiggered by Jupiter, it's another one of Mrs Brown's boys:

Andrew Brown:

Andrew, the younger brother of former Prime Minister Gordon brown, was given the role of head of media relations with EDF Energy in 2004.
EDF were a company who would have been more than hopeful of a favourable report from COMARE. The reason for this being that EDF were wanting to build a new nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point in Somerset. Those plans are now going ahead having been given the green light just last month. We're not talking pocket change either, with a reported cost of £16 - £25 billion it is clear to see that such a project will not only generate a huge amount of power, but also a huge amount of cash to the fat cats at the top.

Gordon Brown:

The former PM, who spoke over the phone to Gerry McCann after Madeleine's disappearance. Brown was pushing for the reintroduction of nuclear power plant projects In 2008 he called for oil-rich states to invest heavily in the development of nuclear power in the UK. In March 2008, he made the announcement that not only would the rebuilding take place on the 23 existing reactors, but that it would extend to the development of more brand new sites. If it's somewhere between 16 and 25 billion for one site, imagine the amount needed for over 23! That's a lot of investment, and for that sort of money the potential returns must have been astronomical.

More on Gordon Brown and the McCann case can be read here:

JK Rowling, another financial backer of the McCanns in the early days, although in fairness not any more, said of Gordon Brown:

“I know him as affable, funny and gregarious, a great listener, a kind and loyal friend.”

Aww, that's nice..............moving on.

Tony Blair:

In 2006 Tony Blair, having worked behind the scenes on developments for some time, officially showed his hand. He announced that the future of UK power lay with nuclear energy, and pre-empted what Gordon Brown would later follow up, with the introduction of over 23 new power stations.

Blair was also responsible for giving a peerage to Lord Timothy Bell, of Bell Pottinger.

Bell Pottinger:

Bell Pottinger represented the McCanns, as well as Mark Warner Holidays (The Ocean Club in PDL being one of Warner's complexes). Lord Bell admitted to taking a £500,00 sweetener to keep the McCanns on the front pages of our daily papers for a year."The McCanns paid me £500,000 in fees to keep them on the front page of every single newspaper for a year, which we did"

A simple google search reveals the PR specialists have enjoyed a long professional relationship with the mighty Carter Ruck, who acted on many occasions for the McCanns. Most recently when they successfully sued the Sunday Times on behalf of the couple on a no win no fee basis. This was after a complaint by the McCanns that the newspaper had claimed Kate and Gerry had hidden the efit that many claim is Gerry himself, for a period of 5 years. It was in fact a year, but that matters not, Carter Ruck won the case, and now the suppression of evidence story appears as though the McCanns did nothing wrong.

The threat of Carter Ruck circling like predators stalking their prey, has every newspaper in the land afraid to print anything that paints the McCanns in a bad light. Newspapers must be sold however, and the McCann case sells, what we find ourselves left with is a set of editors too weak, and without moral substance who decide to print any old rubbish, if that means framing others or printing ludicrous stories, as long as it sells tomorrow's fish and chip wrappings then so be it.

Back to Bell Pottinger.

In November / December 2005, Private Eye revealed that Bell Pottinger was receiving £8,000 a month to give strategic advice to the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. The Eye asked:

"Why is the Bell Pottinger PR firm passing on potted biographies of MPs focusing on their supposed attitude to nuclear power to the Nuclear Decommissioning Agency (NDA)? The NDA's job, after all, is to clean up the mess left by the old atomic generation, not to promote new nuclear power stations."

Using the Freedom of Information Act, NuclearSpin obtained a copy of Bell Pottinger's pitch to the NDA. It underlined the extent of the companies involvement with the nuclear industry. It states that Bell Pottinger's consultants "have worked in a variety of capacities with the nuclear industry. These include:

-Providing strategic advice and support for the Chairman and Chief Executive of BNFL including crisis management
-Advising BNFL on corporate and financial communications
-Developing day-to-day public affairs programmes for BNFL and the BNIF
-Working with Parliamentarians with interests in the nuclear industry
-Monitoring and tracking nuclear issues ranging from Parliamentary committees to public enquiries
-Directly managing the in-house communications for the UKAEA and AEA -Technology through privatisation
-Briefing and rehearsing industry executives appearing before Select -Committees."
-The NDA's briefing paper for potential PR consultants boasted that the "NDA is not unique in being an organisation committed to open and transparent engagement with stakeholders, but it may well be the first organisation that has such objectives built in to its statutory requirements". -Nevertheless, Bell Pottinger's successful pitch includes:
"Advising on the handling of particular announcements identifying the issues and bear traps in advance, advising on messaging, media strategy and tactics, questions and answers"
"Advising on an appropriate contact programme ie who are the journalists that should be courted, what are their issues, how best to handle them"
"Providing off the record information".

Which brings me nicely onto British Nuclear Fuels Limited.

Edward Smethurst:

Much is written about Smethurst on the internet, some of it extremely sinister, but let's start with a little background information.

Edward Smethurst is a 33rd degree mason  At the age of 23 Smethurst, already a successful property developer, joined the in house legal team at BNFL, he would go on to serve the state owned nuclear company for 7 years, after which in 2000, he joined the board of directors for a conservatory company, Ultraframe. Ultraframe was bought for a sum of £58 million in 2006, by Brian Kennedy, and was the only member of a 13 man board that Kennedy kept on. Smethurst later went on to become a director of the Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd fund, and became legal advisor to the McCanns.

Brian Kennedy:

Not to be confused with Kate McCann's uncle of the same name, this Brian Kennedy is a multi millionaire who officially became involved in the case on the 21st september 2007 when he made the following statement: 

"In light of the quite literally incredible accusations against Gerry and Kate McCann, which are clearly exacerbating their emotional torture, I felt compelled to offer, along with other like-minded businessmen, financial support and the full logistical support of the Latium team.

"That support is principally our in-house lawyer Ed Smethurst and (official spokesman) Clarence Mitchell.

"This will relieve the McCanns of the daily pressure of co-ordinating the legal teams that will expedite the clearing of Gerry and Kate's names, allowing all parties to refocus on finding Madeleine."

Prior to this help, legal costs to protect the McCanns had been met by donations from the public to the McCann's fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned Ltd. After questions as to why the fund was being used for the McCanns legal and PR expenses, the arrival of Kennedy and his wallet couldn't have come at a better time. 

Indeed it was Kennedy and Smethurst who arranged a meeting with Robert Murat, the man it appeared was being framed by a number of the tapas 9 in the early days of the investigation. According to Goncalo Amaral, Jane Tanner identified Murat as the man she saw carrying a small child on the street in the immediate vicinity of 5a at 9:20pm on the night Madeleine was reported missing:

"Jane Tanner was placed inside a police surveillance van (with windows that allow you to look outside, from the van, without being seen), the van was parked in a strategic position, near apartment 5A, and PJ investigators took Murat with them, making exactly the same walk the man carrying a child had made, according to Jane Tanner.Jane Tanner looked at Murat walking and told police she was sure he was the same man, she recognised the way he walked, with no doubt."

Tanner later denied this,and reports emerged that Murat had filed papers against JT for calumnious denunciation.

But back to the meeting between Kennedy, Smethurst, Robert Murat and Murat's lawyer, Francisco Pagarete, below part of a report taken from the McCannfiles:


Brian Kennedy, the home improvements tycoon backing the McCanns, admitted yesterday that he flew to Portugal last November and spent an evening with Robert Murat, apart from the McCanns the only other official suspect. A source close to Kennedy said he was "gathering information".

Kennedy's lawyer, Ed Smethurst, approached Murat through a mutual friend and said that Kennedy wanted to offer him a job.

But the job offer never transpired. Kennedy spent the evening with Murat and his lawyers at his aunt's house in Praia da Luz, discussing Madeleine's disappearance.

He left with a "flea in his ear" after being confronted over reports that Metodo 3, the McCanns' private investigators, had suspicions about Murat.

The full details of what was discussed that night have never been revealed, but it is reported that a deal was reached that stopped Murat from suing the McCanns and members of the tapas 7 for their part in framing him. 

Kennedy's cash also paid for private investigation team Metodo 3, a rag tag and bobtail team who regularly lied about knowing who had taken Madeleine, and that they were close to solving the case. Their false claims were printed in all major media outlets, and, at a point when Kate and Gerry had been named arguido by the PJ, went a long way to diverting attention from the suspected couple, convincing the public that Portugal had it wrong, and the McCanns were innocent.

In 2013 the owner of the agency and three other detectives were arrested for  activities, including money laundering and illegally spying on politicians.

Reports were now surfacing that Metodo 3 were using money from the fund to pay witnesses to change their story and even fabricate stories designed to swerve ideas of the McCanns involvement in the disappearance of Madeleine, cue Clarence:

Clarence Mitchell:

"It is a ridiculous suggestion to claim Metodo 3 are paying witnesses to change their story"

Clarence acted on behalf of the McCanns as a PR spokesman. He spun the truth for his employees, "fed the media stories" and openly claimed to manipulate the press into changing the McCanns words, when he announced the following at a self promotional gig at coventry university on the 18th October 2007:

"I would pull journalists to one side and say, look, if you want further co operation, this is what we said, and this is what we meant"

Mitchell's involvement has without doubt deflected blame away from the McCanns with a series of leaked stories, and misinformation.

Was it so ridiculous, as Mitchell claimed, that stories were arising about Metodo 3?

In an interview, Portuguese lawyer, Dr Marcos Aragão Correia claimed that:

"the Spanish detectives (Metodo 3) asked me to arrange for evidence against Gonçalo Amaral".

Also here, claims that Metodo 3 were trying to frame Goncalo Amaral:

Dr Marcos Aragão Correia:

As we've seen Correia and Amaral don't have what you'd call a glittering friendship, In Correia we have a man on a mission, and the people paying for his services Metodo 3 were employed through Brian Kennedy's wallet, by the McCanns. Correia himself confirms he was contracted to Metodo 3 in the following statement:

"The secrecy of the contract which bounds me to Método 3 stops me from revealing details regarding the private investigation"

As I said earlier, Metodo 3 had claimed throughout their time working for the McCanns that they knew where Madeleine was, and that the case would be solved soon. Now with Marcos Correia on board, a story that reflected the McCann's early version came to light. A story that was totally unfounded, but filled the front pages with the subliminal message that the McCanns were, despite being arguidos, innocent.

What Correia claimed was that some "underworld contacts" had told him that Madeleine had been kidnapped by paedophiles, murdered, and her body disposed of in a reservoir. What followed was an publicised investigation, showing divers entering the reservoir and discovering bones. The papers lapped it up, Kate and Gerry gained more support, and very little followed. Especially as the bones weren't even human.
Ok, I'm nearly there smile emoticon if you're still awake I thank you for staying with me and I will buy you all a jar of coffee in this life or the next.

So now we've got the names linked to the case out of the way, let's get back to COMARE.

In 2011 COMARE announced that, contrary to a German report of studies between 2002 and 2007, nuclear power didn't pose any cancer threat to children.

The German report had found a cluster of leukaemia cases occurring near the Krummel nuclear power plant. This wasn't breaking news from COMARE, but more reaffirmation of reports from a time when Gerry McCann was a medical advisor on the sub committee.

Would it be fair to assume Gerry played a major role in the report?

If not, it is obvious that he was moving within circles of very influential people, and that billions of pounds were at stake.

Could that be the reason a sudden influx of a dream team of powerful figures bent over backwards for the McCanns?

Goncalo Amaral was asked the following question during an interview for Porto Canal on March 14th 2014:

Q:" Were you removed from your post and sidelined until you left the Judiciary Police because you were too close to finding the truth?"

A: “No, no. I left the investigation, I was removed from the investigation because the case had to be dominated politically. Just that. Because I opposed the archiving. I told directors in the Police directly that I did not agree with the archiving. They suggested to me, they told me that there are processes, there are investigations that do not end, that have no result. And that I shouldn’t do a lot. That I should consider the case had ended. I always opposed that. That is why I left the investigation, not because I was close to anything. I don’t see my leaving as being the result of someone fearing anything. The question was that the case is political. Only politics. It’s politics that is driving this matter. When politics enters the investigations, when investigations are politically correct, we get nowhere.”

Whatever your thoughts on this, it's an interesting topic, and one that the more is looked into seems to throw up more and more links. I'm not saying it's the catalyst of a cover up, but it certainly makes you wonder.