It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Madeleine McCann: Scotland Yard Opens "Formal Investigation"

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Aug, 17 2013 @ 11:35 PM
reply to post by destination now

The police have definitely taken the cadaver dog's indications out of the investigation totally.

If you read Madeleine McCann: Vector Addition, toward the end of the thread, you will see a possible reason for this. I believe the reason is in the video of the search of the villa rented by the McCanns after they left the Ocean Club. There is a long version of the video on the website.

The dog indications may be valid, or they may not be valid. It's an open question, I believe, because of something Martin Grime did during the search of the villa. Dog indications have a limited value in court anyway. They are very problematic.

I think this investigation will never go anywhere mainly for political reasons, as outlined in my other thread. I think Scotland Yard is putting on a "dog and pony show" for the public. Why this is being done is a little too deep for me.

One is left with the question, "Who are the McCanns, and what is the reason for their political pull?"

Another question is what in the world has happened to the British press on this issue? Libel fright? Is Britain still part of the free world? Is everyone, present company excepted, over there bonkers? You tell me.

edit on 17-8-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 18 2013 @ 05:34 AM
reply to post by ipsedixit

I have to say that I have no idea what it is all about. I have followed the case since the beginning, been a member of dedicated forums and such and am still puzzled.

Whilst there are many who believe that the McCanns are being protected or that someone else who was there is being protected, I just don't see it myself..the McCanns would have been silenced a long time ago and we would just have heard very little about it.

My own theory is that there was an accident, the McCanns knew that their livelihoods and retaining custody of their remaining children were at stake, they panicked and plotted the "abduction" scenario. Whilst they were by no means wealthy, they did indeed have a couple of connections, media etc as did a few other members of the group and they utlised these in the best way possible, getting media involved at a very early stage, possibly even before calling the police. This ensured that the police were effectively ham strung by the massive media presence, before they could even start investigating

Finally, their coup d'tat .was the timing of a strange political landscape in the UK, where Blair was stepping down as PM and Gordon Brown (unelected and disliked) taking over and my personal opinion is that Brown was looking for his "Diana" moment, to be seen as a caring, concerned "man of the people" and he initially, threw his weight behind the McCanns campaign to "Find Madeleine"

This didn't last for very long though, within a few weeks, an envoy dispatched by Blair, Sheree Dodd, had reported that not all was as it seemed with the McCanns and although Brown did not make any public declarations, he did distance himself by refusing to meet with the McCanns (Clarence Mitchell famously let this slip in a statement that the McCanns had been denied a meeting with Brown, but were offered a mid-level consular meeting, which they had refused)

Whilst this does not explain the initial reaction from the Foreign Office, perhaps the media had something to do with that, but ultimately when it all started to go pear shaped, there would have been too many people with some serious egg on their face and rather than lose face, they just continued to let it snowball.

Sometimes, I have wondered if it was part of some strange, freaky mind game with the public..just how much BS will we swallow, when I consider that Clarence Mitchell gave up his govt job as head of Media Monitoring to go an work for the McCanns, he must have known it was going to be a longer term gig. Furthermore, I look at the number of people even on this site, who inherently distrust the media, yet the majority still spout the abduction story, even when they think the parents are untruthful, they are still spouting this belief that the girl could still be alive, even though statistically that would be almost impossible and while I understand that the dogs findings are subject to scrutiny, I still think they give a good indication of what Madeleine's fate was.

Now of course we have the Met enquiry, and Andy Redwood saying that Madeleine could be alive or could be dead? And that amongst all of the people that they want to question, the McCanns and their friends are not included and yet again we have a slew of media stories about swarthy paedos (some of them dead) that the Met think may be involved, yet still claiming the girl could be alive? WTF?

I am still hoping though that the Met are playing a very careful game and being sure to eliminate all other possibilities before creating a watertight case and turning back to the only real suspects in this whole sorry affair, the parents themselves

Other than that, I'm stumped as well lol

posted on Aug, 20 2013 @ 07:59 PM
Newly published stories in the British press telling the story of Antonio Castela, the taxi driver who asserts that he drove Madeleine, a woman and two men on the evening following her disappearance might cause the casual observer of this case to sit up in excitement at the possibility of a credible new lead, a lead that could be followed by Scotland Yard as they proceed with a proper investigation of what the "wogs" botched up so badly in 2007.

From the story by KIRAN RANDHAWA
Published: 16 August 2013

A taxi driver who says he could help solve the mystery of Madeleine McCann's disappearance has urged Scotland Yard to investigate his claims.

Antonio Castela says he picked up three men, a woman and a girl who looked like the missing three-year-old near the Spanish border in the Algarve the night after she vanished. . . . .

Mr Castela, 73, said: "I want to tell them what I saw and assist in the investigation. I remember all the details. I would be very happy if the police re-open the investigation and if I could help in this case. This case has haunted me for a long time." . . .

May 2007. Mr Castela said he picked up the men, woman and child at 7.50pm, [May 4, 2007] an hour's drive away.

He took them two miles to the Hotel Apolo in his neighbourhood, Vila Real de Santo António, near Faro, where they got into a blue BMW and drove away. He said: "In 2007 I called police and told them what I had seen. Since then, no one from the police has spoken to me or showed interest in my story. No one came to collect my statement."

He said he recalls Madeleine, in pink pyjamas, sitting on one of the men's laps, and he noticed the "black spot" — a distinctive mark in her right eye. "I think my story may give a clue that has not been followed. I do not know what happened to Maddy, but I know that day, she was still alive in my cab."

Except that the story of this taxi driver was published in full in 2008 along with the added assertions that the woman he drove looked like Kate McCann and one of the men like Robert Murat.

The nuttiness continues.
edit on 20-8-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 02:48 AM
reply to post by ipsedixit

Haha yes, that story has been regurgitated a few times now, and notably Clarence Mitchell himself dismissed it as nonsense, saying that the taxi driver must have been mistaken because Madeleine did not have any ticks, only the marking in her eye (the famous eye that the whole campaign was originally built around, but yet now Kate says it was only a fleck and they didn't make much of it...seriously you couldn't make it up)

Furthermore, Clarence asserted that the taxi driver could not have seen a woman who he thought was Kate on the night of 3rd May as she was at dinner in the tapas with all of their friends. However, the taxi driver states he picked them up about 8pm and the McCanns own timeline says that they arrived at the tapas bar at approx 8.30pm, so yet another lie from their spokesman.

The continuing saga of the McCanns...I really hope that Scotland Yard are genuine about getting to the bottom of this or we are going to keep hearing this nonsense over and over, because lets face it, if there is money still to be made the McCanns will just keep going.

Oh and you are totally correct about the xenophobia involved in the case, some of the abuse hurled at the Portuguese, not just by UK citizens, but from across the globe, is really disturbing. The only thing the Portuguese police did wrong in the first instance was to not arrest the parents and hold them for intensive questioning in the first 48hrs, that would probably have solved this mystery right at the start.

posted on Aug, 21 2013 @ 09:06 AM

Originally posted by destination now
Oh and you are totally correct about the xenophobia involved in the case, some of the abuse hurled at the Portuguese, not just by UK citizens, but from across the globe, is really disturbing. The only thing the Portuguese police did wrong in the first instance was to not arrest the parents and hold them for intensive questioning in the first 48hrs, that would probably have solved this mystery right at the start.

I think so too. If Kate and Gerry had been arrested immediately on charges of child neglect and had been aggressively questioned by the PJ in the first 48, I think the question of whether Madeleine had actually been abducted or not would have been conclusively answered.

I also think all of the McCanns, parents and twins, should have been tested for drugs immediately. The police really missed a chance in not laying charges and in not testing those twins, when they had good reason to wonder if they had been drugged.

The relationship between the UK and Portugal is at the root of these errors on the part of the PJ, in my opinion.

edit on 21-8-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 22 2013 @ 07:56 AM
reply to post by ipsedixit

Yes, I agree, for some reason (not a conspiracy one, or for protection or whatever) the UK media got behind the McCanns, which, led in my opinion, to the political shenanigans of railroading the case, (and of course the Lisbon treaty was in it's final stages) But I think that the politicians were not quite banking on the McCanns still bleating on about abductors, suing people left right and centre and begging for money for the "fund" six years down the line, they probably hoped that they could let them off the hook and that they would be grateful they avoided criminal charges for neglect at the very least and disappear into the horizon...of course they didn't and I'll bet there are a few people now wishing they hadn't bothered to help them in the first place.

I'm still holding out hope that Scotland Yard do intend to investigate properly and build a watertight case with no wiggle room whatsoever for the McCanns, because it seems that is the only thing that is finally going to shut them up and provide a dignified conclusion for the fate on an innocent young child, who in my opinion didn't get a chance to grow up thanks to her selfish, narcissistic and greedy parents.

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 04:16 AM
The press in the UK has been abuzz recently because Scotland Yard has sent a letter to the Portugese authorities requesting assistance in questioning three burglary suspects known to have been in the area of Praia da Luz the night Madeleine McCann was announced by her mother as having been abducted.

Analysis of phone records from that evening have revealed numerous calls between the three, thought to have been members of a gang of burglars, at the time of the alleged abduction.

Earlier this month, Sky News reported that a police team were hunting three men whose phones were "red hot" after Madeleine went missing from her family's Praia da Luz apartment in May 2007.

If you will indulge me for a moment, I would like to present a small vignette which might help one to understand the position of the police in all of this. They sent a group of four detectives to Portugal to meet with Portugese counterparts in connection with this business of the burglars. The group of four have now returned to the UK. No arrests have been made.

Years ago when I lived in the savage precincts of an undergraduate residence at an unnamed university far from my present abode and associated with people who are no longer part of my life and who ceased to be part of my life when I left university so many, many years ago and whom I have not seen since and have heard no news of in decades, I was present at a "smoker".

I won't go into details about what a "smoker" is except to say that a fillum was shown at this smoker which was the sort of thing one might see on the National Geographic channel, only more so.

The story was set in South America and depicted the adventures of a chimpanzee and a very attractive South American girl whose clothing happened to be at the laundry that day.

The girl in the movie, who was a first class example of feminine beauty, smiled and laughed and rolled around on the grass and wiggled various appealing parts of her anatomy and stretched out toward the chimp in a very enticing way.

The chimp, on the other hand, was the model of gentlemanly decorum. He seemed to be unsure of what was expected of him. He looked around, perhaps at others off camera, perhaps at his handler, as if looking for some clue from them, some indication of what he should do.

The girl would get his attention and take his hand and bring it up to some part of her, to make contact, but he just let the hand drop when she let go and kept looking around as if puzzled by the situation. Perhaps he was fearful that members of his own troop of chimpanzees might see the film and he didn't want to be seen in an embarrassing situation. Perhaps chimpanzees frown upon the sort of scenario that was apparently being staged and perhaps he himself disapproved of the situation but was too polite to do anything but to be completely passive.

Nothing happened in the movie but the preliminaries, staged by the girl, were charming, to me at least.

Coming back to the present, we are told by Scotland Yard via the press, that the burglars were burning up the mobile airwaves between themselves after Madeleine was abducted, and to the average person sitting at home, it must have seemed that the police were, at last, hot on the trail of the kidnappers, because, after all, if I wrote for a British tabloid and had just nicked a toddler, that's the first thing I would do, call all my friends asking them what I should do now, how I should handle it.

Any non-criminal would do the same. Any average nitwit, watching the telly, would think and do the same thing if they were on the way home and on impulse had nicked a toddler. It's obvious that the first thing to do is call your friends and talk about it. What to do about it? It makes sense.

The police department, however, would look at it differently. A rash of phone calls would never be made immediately after a crime that had been planned by professionals.

In fact, if a rash of phone calls were made by a group of criminals operating in the neighborhood, immediately after such a crime, it would almost certainly be regarded by the police as a sign that the criminals in question were innocent of the crime in question and perhaps had been surprised by the sudden invasion of the area by a heavy police presence and were likely alerting their fellows of that presence and telling them to abandon the area immediately.

But politically, considering the heavy tax payer expense having already been incurred by Scotland Yard's renewed investigation of the Madeleine case, going through the motions would undoubtedly have been expected of the police by their political masters.

The police, like the chimp in the movie, are being perfect gentlemen about the whole thing, but nothing is going to happen.

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 05:55 AM
reply to post by ipsedixit

The thing is, none of this information is actually coming from Scotland Yard, it's probably the work of Clarence Mitchell (if he is still on board with the McCanns now that he is launching his political career) or other "sources close to the family" Scotland Yard have not made any comment since the Crimewatch show last October, when Andy Redwood definitively ruled out the sighting allegedly made by Jane Tanner, and instead turned the focus onto the man seen at least 40 mins later by the Smith family (who was subsequently id'd as possibly being Gerry McCann himself)

Not that it makes any difference to the McCanns who still portray "Tannerman" on their website, as being of interest to the investigation, when Andy Redwood has specifically said that the man came forward and was in fact an innocent father collecting his child from the creche...Don't know how the McCanns and Jane Tanner would feel about that, having their fabricated sighting of Madeleine being carried away from the apartment, tracked down and eliminated by the police!

Interestingly in the Crimewatch reconstruction, David Payne, his wife Fiona and her mother, Diane Webster were very conspicuously absented from the group and whilst all of the other tapas friends were named, they were not and referred to as "other friends" so I'm not sure what that is about, have they changed their statements perhaps? There was of course the very strange account that David Payne had visited the McCanns apartment earlier in the evening of the 3rd of May, claiming he stayed for 30 mins and that he saw all of the children, dressed in white pyjamas and looking "angelic" or words to that effect. Kate however, (having just got out of the shower, some 30 mins after apparently having had a bath) claims his visit lasted 30 seconds. Furthermore, there were some rather unsavoury allegations made about David Payne by another couple of Dr's, the Gaspers, on a previous holiday that the group were on, so I don't know if that has anything to do with the sudden departure of the Paynes from the narrative.

I am still living in hope that Scotland Yard are looking to eliminate every other possibility before turning back to the McCanns and their friends. The cost of the investigation is astronomical in these times of austerity and the fact that all other missing children have not been afforded this level of interest from Scotland Yard, I do believe that something will have to happen soon, because the entire case is reaching levels of absurdity that I personally have never before seen and judging from the online comments in the media as each "new development" is reported, the vast majority of the public seem to agree.

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 06:08 AM

I wish I had time for this. It sounds interesting and I have always liked complex cold cases.

Web sleuths has an enormous file on the case and it's staffed by a dozen or so semi professorial posters. New case tips are added daily with several just now coming in.

"Portuguese sources tell local media the three suspects Scot Yard identified are ex-staff of Ocean Club, managers of apartments"

I don't have a clue what that means, however so much going on here to get involved. Dozens of missing children and adults here. The Holly Dunn disappearance is as madding of a case as I have ever seen. When your getting to alien abduction and using psychics then you truly have a frozen, not a cold, case. It has always amazed me how so many people just drop off the face of the Earth, are never heard from again, dead or alive and the case is never solved. There are 81 such cases here since 1988-people just vanish.

As always be wary of websleuths Take what you need, be polite, and leave the rest.

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 06:28 AM
reply to post by spooky24

There are loads of dedicated sources for the Madeleine McCann disappearance. However, rather than just being a case of a missing child, this case looks more likely to be be an accidental death/subsequent cover up by the parents and their friends. In fact, during the investigation, EVR Dogs were used to search the apartment and the hire car that the parents rented. The dogs alerted to cadaver odour and blood in the apartment, the hire car, on Kate McCanns clothes, the cuddly toy that Madeleine had and other items of childrens clothing. Therefore, I think it can be reasonably concluded that the poor child died in the apartment.

Sadly though, no evidence of her body has ever been found, and as the dog alerts are merely an indicator and as such cannot be used as solid evidence in a court of law, the McCanns have thus far evaded justice.

If you ever get the time to read about it, this site is a good place to start McCann Files be warned though, there is a heck of a lot of information and if you really want to go googly eyed and have a brain meltdown, you can read the rogatory interviews by the so called Tapas 7 (friends of the McCanns) they are all available at the McCann files site as well

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 01:20 PM

destination now
reply to post by ipsedixit

The thing is, none of this information is actually coming from Scotland Yard, it's probably the work of Clarence Mitchell (if he is still on board with the McCanns now that he is launching his political career) or other "sources close to the family" Scotland Yard have not made any comment since the Crimewatch show last October, when Andy Redwood definitively ruled out the sighting allegedly made by Jane Tanner, and instead turned the focus onto the man seen at least 40 mins later by the Smith family (who was subsequently id'd as possibly being Gerry McCann himself)

On Sky News this story is being sourced to Martin Brunt who has covered this case for a long time, a reasonable reporter who is, by no means, in the McCanns' camp or likely to repeat anything they or Mitchell says without naming them. The story of the burglars has been around for a while. I'm not sure that Scotland Yard has said nothing about it. You may be right, but there have been numerous "leads" floating around this story ever since it began. None of the police departments have ever given chapter and verse on what they were doing, to the press, at least not officially.

If you read this story from January 3rd of this year there is an impression that the reporter is closer to a police source or sources than Clarence Mitchell. I can't imagine Mitchell sharing this much information off the record with the press. tml

edit on 2-2-2014 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 03:32 PM
reply to post by ipsedixit

No, I'm sorry, I really don't think any of that has come from the police, the "informed Source" has team McCann all over it. SY have repeatedly said that they will not be giving a running commentary, and when they do talk about the case e.g. the Crimewatch reconstruction, it is always official.

As for Clarence Mitchell, he'll spout any sort of BS if the thinks it will help the cause. The majority of nonsense sightings, Victoria Beckham lookalike suspects blah blah all come straight out of Mitchell's mouth. Carlos Anjos, a senior member of the PJ had this to say about him

"He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth. Finally we know what side truth is on."
Source< br />
Brunt also has not reported anything negative about the McCanns since the media were silenced with the threat of libel action, after the Express bowed down to pressure and gave them an apology and a payout (notably it didn't get to court, but obviously the threat from Carter Ruck was enough) And of course, Sky being Murdoch owned, has always had a pro McCann slant, though I'm sure that as soon as the tide turns, Murdoch's news empire will swoop like vultures. So I don't really think that Brunt is unbiased in his reporting, but it is cleverly reported to make it look like it's coming from the police, but nothing would come from SY under the heading of an informed source...and lets face it, SY and many others are under scrutiny this now regarding the corrupt practices between the press and the police, so I think it unlikely that would happen in this high profile case.

No, I think the McCanns are bricking it, because they really don't know what is going on and will do anything to try and second guess the investigation and there doing it via the media as always. I wonder what DCI Redwood and his colleagues make of the ridiculous and absurd stories in the press?

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 03:56 PM

destination now
reply to post by ipsedixit

No, I'm sorry, I really don't think any of that has come from the police, the "informed Source" has team McCann all over it.

I disagree. In my opinion the story is too elaborate and too specific in relation to the burglars. I don't think it is being made up out of whole cloth, but it could be at least in part from "the McCann camp", as it were, since they have said in the past that they are being informed by the police about developments in the case. Personally, I don't think they are getting the kind of detail reported in the Daily Mail story. I think information possibly from McCann related sources was probably put together with leaks from sources in the police department for the story.

It follows along logically from information made available a long time ago by the police regarding an intensive analysis of phone traffic in the area at the time of the kidnapping.

Having said that, I do believe that the McCanns might very well be uneasy about what exactly is going on with the police investigation and would not be above attempting to "prime the pump" hoping to get the police to show their hand a little more than they have.

edit on 2-2-2014 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 2 2014 @ 05:16 PM
reply to post by ipsedixit

Don't forget the McCanns have an expert PR team at their disposal as they have right from the start. It's their job to build complex stories around snippets of truth.

SY have only confirmed the letter of request sent to Portugal, it's contents have not been made public. The 3 burglars/club workers is 100 % spin IMO, it is built around reports of actual robberies at the ocean club before MM went missing.

Why on earth would police give weeks of notice to these people, why would arrests be 'imminent' then cancelled? .If people on the investigation were leaking info, why would they not be prosecuted..maybe because none of it is true.

posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 03:19 AM
reply to post by DrHammondStoat

It is possible, but I can't believe that the press who are reporting this sort of thing, who are not the tabloid press, would go so far as to write the burglar story without some kind of verification from police sources that this is what is going on, although the police themselves were reported as having sent the letter asking for Portuguese permission and cooperation weeks before it had actually been sent.

For me there is just too much detail about these burglars for the story not to have some reality. Maybe I am being naïve.

The tabloid press has certainly jumped to conclusions repeatedly based on nothing more, it would seem, than a desire to sell newspapers.

The McCanns definitely have an interest in stories published of sightings and suspects that lend credence to their contention that Madeleine may still be alive and that she was abducted, but are they concocting and planting such stories? I doubt this, but I do recall that there have been allegations that Metodo 3 paid witnesses of dubious backgrounds to come up with dubious stories, one assumes, to milk the Find Madeleine of money.

Is that still going on, if it ever did, and do such antics come directly from the McCanns themselves? I don't think so.

I think the British police and politicians, who are spending large amounts of taxpayer money in this latest investigation, themselves, have a motive for exaggerating the importance of phone calls and burglars, for example. One could almost say that they have gotten into the "game" of investigating Madeleine in ways that have only slightly more legitimacy than those of Metodo 3.

It is not surprising that the ever vilified Portuguese police are half-hearted in their response to British efforts to engage them in trying to re-solve a case that was, for them, solved a long time ago, although never legally tried. I sympathise with the Portuguese.

They must be wondering whom they are being asked to work with.

British police practice no longer regards cadaver dog indications as an investigative tool, or at least, not in the Madeleine case. British police practice is willing to set aside an E-Fit drawing if it too closely resembles the parent of a missing child, at least in the Madeleine case. It must be a wonder to the Portuguese police that the E-Fit drawing in question was kept hidden from the public for so long.

One might look at this case and wonder if part of what is going on is a set piece justification for massive technical surveillance of telephone communications.

The case is turning into an infinity loop or a perpetual investigation machine funded by the Find Madeleine Fund and the British taxpayer. Many wonder if this process is one in which guilty people have ingeniously contrived to mobilize public money and the police force itself to shield them from prosecution.

So yes, anything is possible with regard to the story of the burglars, but I tend to think it may well be a case of the police and not the McCanns grasping at straws in this instance.

edit on 3-2-2014 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-2-2014 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 05:22 AM
reply to post by ipsedixit

I agree entirely with DrHammondStoat, this is just pure BS spin. The media is reporting the same bias against the Portuguese police as it always did. There are several SY detectives based in Faro and the meeting last week with Andy Redwood and their Portuguese counterparts, I don't think had anything to do with burglars. It is just press speculation...burglars don't steal children, we know that and the police know that, though I wouldn't be surprised if they are trying to track down burglars who may well have seen something in connection to Madeleine's disappearance.

I certainly wouldn't say you are naive, you clearly have a good handle on the case from what I have seen of your posts on the subject, but you have to admit that the press have been printing nonsense about this case since May 2007, apart from a brief spell after the cadaver dogs visited and alerted to many sources directly connected to the McCanns.

The McCanns PR machine is a powerful, manipulative and dishonest one, and they really will stoop to any level to protest the innocence of Kate and Gerry, and they have tried (in some cases, successfully) to silence any one who dares to question their version of events.

It is my belief that Scotland Yard have an enormous task ahead of them, they have to succeed where the PJ failed and that is to provide concrete, indisputable evidence that will stand up in court and secure a conviction. I honestly do not believe in a cover up, because if there was some nefarious protection, then we would never have heard of the McCanns and SY would certainly not have launched a new investigation.

We know that the mobile phone data is important and the PJ already had that information. However, they were not allowed to use it back in 2007 as it was considered intrusive. Similarly with the bank information, the UK govt denied a request from the PJ to analyse the McCanns financial dealings. Now though it looks like SY are getting both the McCanns (and friends) phone information as well as the banking data, although the press would have us believe they are checking the records of burglars/OC staff/uncle tom cobleigh and all, I think it's safe to assume that the McCanns and their friends will most definitely come under the radar, because although SY have said that they are not looking at the McCanns et al, they would be unlikely to admit that they were and I really think that SY are playing the Mc's game of smoke and mirrors, obfuscation and confusion is good, hence the spin machine going into overdrive with burglars, dead or alive, itinerant workers etc etc because they must try and keep the public onside at all times!

Ultimately though if the police have enough evidence to charge the Mc's they'll do so and I think at this point the public have had more than enough of the Mc's to last a lifetime....and Kate's self belief doesn't really match the reality anyway, just prior to being made arguido in 2007, Kate mused that "if they were arrested, there would be rioting in the UK" LOL, didn't happen did it?

So unless Andy Redwood actually stands in front of a camera and reads out a statement about arresting burglars etc then I will remain unconvinced that any of it is true.

posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 05:40 AM
reply to post by ipsedixit

I think you'll find the second letter of request SY sent was confirmed by them on the 10th January, there are no news stories about it prior to then (unless I'm much mistaken), I think unverified sources come everytime from Clarence Mitchell and his gang, burglars and gypsies have been a favourite since 2007!

Why even papers like the telegraph and the times would include reports of arrests and 3 burglars is infuriating. As far as I can see they justify it by saying 'it has been reported' (by a tabloid rag) , I suppose they can just shift the responsibility of checking the source to where they got it from.

i suppose the proof of whether SY ARE looking at 3 burglars as suspects, will be if they question them. If they quietly disappear into the ether and are never mentioned again over the next few months, it was probably just propaganda.

I also anticipate a flurry of 'burglar' or gypsy stories as we get to the verdict of the McCann vs. Amaral libel trial which has been completely ignored by the UK press. That would be another example of spin, if the McCann's lose, their version of events will be discredited and their PR machine will go into overdrive trying to distract the public.

posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 05:52 AM

destination now
reply to post by ipsedixit

It is my belief that Scotland Yard have an enormous task ahead of them, they have to succeed where the PJ failed and that is to provide concrete, indisputable evidence that will stand up in court and secure a conviction. I honestly do not believe in a cover up, because if there was some nefarious protection, then we would never have heard of the McCanns and SY would certainly not have launched a new investigation.

I hope this is true, the burglar stuff is not confirmed by SY. They could be eliminating people from the enquiry and this would take a long time to do thoroughly. Part of me fears a white wash but if that was so, wouldn't they just get it over with and pin it on one of the two dead suspects that have been bandied about?

posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 06:48 AM
reply to post by DrHammondStoat

In my opinion, if there was going to be a whitewash, there would never have been any need to start a new investigation, the review would have concluded the desired (from the Mc's POV) result.

The McCanns have proved themselves to be slippery customers, the PJ found that out in 2007, and without solid, irrefutable evidence and of course, lack of a body, sadly there is no case.

However, if SY do intend to "fit up a patsy" then they have to have the same level of evidence to provide to a court of law and of course, if said patsy was already dead, then it would have to be concluded that Madeleine was also dead...end of private limited fund, something the Mc's don't want.

Personally I can see no reason for any political desire to protect the McCanns, they are nobodies in the greater scheme of things, and I have always said that I think they got lucky and it has snowballed from there. But time will tell I suppose, although I just cannot accept a whitewash at this point, because if I did, then I would have to just walk away and never read or write anything about the case again...what would be the point? If TPTB were protecting the McCanns, then nothing I or anyone else could say would make any difference to the outcome.

No, when I see this picture of Andy Redwood, with a sad, yet determined look in his eyes, with a backdrop of a 3yr old Madeleine and his words on the Crimewatch special "we are fighting so hard for Madeleine McCann" it gives me great hope that this is an honest man, who will solve the mystery of what happened to Madeleine on the 3rd May 2007.

ETA, sorry since the new site layout I'm not sure how to embed pics..will have to look that up, but you can see the pic I mean by clicking on the image link

edit on 3-2-2014 by destination now because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-2-2014 by destination now because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 3 2014 @ 07:35 AM
reply to post by destination now

I do think the McCann's have been protected because of who or what they know. There are a few people of interest that were around the Ocean Club on the 7th of May. One was a wealthy man that cut his holiday short and left the day after, he surely could have afforded better than the ocean club. (I can't remember his name at the moment)

Then we have people such as Angus Symington, son of the Ocean Club's owner and dead ringer for Robert Murat! The Symingtons are very wealthy importers and property owners, friendly with British establishment figures.

There's a family called Garveigh, who part owned the Ocean club with the symingons, they are connected to Portuguese nobility and one of them is being investigated by the FBI for claiming to be an Mi5 agent!

So we have all these well (or possibly dodgy!) connected property developer types and Robert Murat who is also involved in property. At one time an empty villa was investigated and was said to have filming equipment inside.

My suspicions is that the ocean club may be a centre not just for holidays but far more sinister things. Certain people don't want this to get out because of who it would connect to.

The Gaspar statement which has never been mentioned in the press, may support this theory.

I was seated between Dave and Gerry who I believe were both speaking about Madeleine. I don't remember the conversation in its entirety, but it seemed they were discussing a possible scenario. I remember Dave telling Gerry something like "she", referring to Madeleine, "would do this". When he mentioned "this", Dave was sucking on one of his fingers, pushing it inside and outside his mouth, while with the other hand he made a circle around his nipple, in a circulatory movement over his clothes. This was done in a provocative manner and carried an explicit insinuation in relation to what he was saying and doing. I remember that I was shocked at this, and looked at Gerry, and also at Dave, to see their reactions. I looked around (page 4) as if saying "did anyone else hear this, or was it just me". There was a nervous silence registered in all the conversations and afterwards, everyone began talking again.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in