Friday, May 17, 2019

WAS THERE AN ATTEMPTED BURGLARY OF MRS PAMELA FENN’S FLAT IN THE WEEKS BEFORE MADELEINE WAS REPORTED MISSING?

The MMRG supports the case made in this article that there was NO burglary or attempted burglary of Pamela Fenn during the weeks before the McCanns' holiday in Praia da Luz in April/May 2007. 

If there was no burglary, as Mrs Fenn claimed in her written statement of 20 August 2007, then we must cast doubt on all the rest of her statements. The claim that she heard Madeleine, or another child, crying for 75 minutes, was always highly improbable, as MMRG and others have explained in other articles her on CMOMM,

MMRG has revised and updated this article - MMRG, 17 May 2019. 

 ==================================================================== 

WAS THERE AN ATTEMPTED BURGLARY OF MRS PAMELA FENN’S FLAT IN THE WEEKS BEFORE MADELEINE WAS REPORTED MISSING?

The flat – Mrs Pamela Fenn on her flat balcony

WAS THERE AN ATTEMPTED BURGLARY OF MRS PAMELA FENN’S FLAT IN THE WEEKS BEFORE MADELEINE WAS REPORTED MISSING? Zzzzzz13



The flat – Mrs Pamela Fenn’s flat, from below
WAS THERE AN ATTEMPTED BURGLARY OF MRS PAMELA FENN’S FLAT IN THE WEEKS BEFORE MADELEINE WAS REPORTED MISSING? Zzzzzz14

Showing the position of Mrs Fenn's flat - 'G' on this photograph, above the McCanns   

WAS THERE AN ATTEMPTED BURGLARY OF MRS PAMELA FENN’S FLAT IN THE WEEKS BEFORE MADELEINE WAS REPORTED MISSING? Carole11



THE EVIDENCE WE HAVE

From the written Statement of Mrs Fenn, 20 August 2007

She claims however, that a week previously she was the victim of an attempted robbery, which was not successful and neither was anything taken, thinking that the crying of the child could be linked to another attempted robbery in the residence.

The News Reports 


‘Sun’, 18 August 2007

Expat Pamela Fenn, 73, told them she disturbed a burglar at her apartment about three weeks before Maddie vanished. She is now to give a formal statement to Portuguese officers.

A friend said: "She was surprised that neither the police nor the McCanns had approached her before”.


‘Mirror’, 18 August 2007

In a new development, a British expat has come forward with dramatic new evidence.

Pamela Fenn said a man broke into her flat above the McCanns' holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, on the Algarve, just weeks before Madeleine disappeared.

There was no sign of a break-in and it is thought the intruder may have had a key. Mrs Fenn, who is in her 70s, found the man scrambling out of the window and tried to grab his ankle. But he escaped.

She reported the incident to Portuguese police but they did not question her again. The information only resurfaced after British police reviewed the case two weeks ago. Mrs Fenn will now be formally interviewed for the first time on Monday.


‘Express’, 18 August 2007

In the weeks before Madeleine disappeared Mrs Fenn scared off an intruder who had apparently let himself into her apartment with a key.

It was one of a series of similar crimes reported to Portuguese police. A police source told the Daily Express: “Next week we will be taking statements from several witnesses. We want to clarify details which may be relevant to the new line of inquiry in the light of the facts we have found”.

Mrs Fenn has told police how she scared off an intruder she found in her apartment in the Ocean Club complex in Praia da Luz in the weeks leading up to Madeleine's disappearance.

There was no sign of a break-in and police believe he may have used a key to get in through the front door.

The terrified mother was watching TV in the evening and went to investigate a noise coming from her bedroom.

Mrs Fenn, who has lived in Praia da Luz for a number of years, discovered a man scrambling out of the window.

She tried to grab his ankle but he escaped. She reported the incident to police but did not believe anything was taken.


A friend of Mrs Fenn told the Daily Express last night: "She is an elderly lady who is quite nervous and was very shaken up after the break-in.

"She was surprised that neither the police nor the McCanns had approached her for information before.

"Even though she lives in the apartment directly upstairs the police had never tried to get in touch with her to ask her if she saw or heard anything the night Madeleine disappeared.

"The first time a police officer spoke to her was when the British officers with sniffer dogs knocked on her door and searched her apartment.

"She told an officer what she knew and now she has been asked to make a formal statement.

"Portuguese officers have told her they will pick her up at 10am on Monday and drive her to police headquarters in Portimao.

"On the night she found an intruder she was sitting at home watching TV when she heard a noise in her bedroom.

"She went to investigate. The man must have heard her coming and was scrambling out of the window. She just saw the back of his head and arm and she tried to push him out of the window.

"She was shaking with fear and called the police. There was no sign of a break in and she thought he must have somehow come in through the front door.

"She now thinks the information may prove significant in the investigation.

"Her niece who lives in England was staying with her when the McCanns were on holiday.


‘Mail on Sunday’, 19 August 

‘The under-fire Portuguese police are preparing to take a fresh look at reports of two earlier break-ins in the apartment block where Madeleine McCann and her family stayed. Both burglaries, one in the apartment directly above the McCanns’ flat, are understood to have happened two weeks before the McCanns arrived in Praia da Luz.

Mrs Fenn scared him off. She has told friends she heard a noise as she watched television and found a man escaping through her bedroom window. Her niece, who was staying with her, also saw the man.

It is also understood that the description given by two witnesses of a man spotted on the night of one of the burglaries is similar to the description given by a friend of the McCanns who said she saw a man carrying a child in his arms the night Madeleine went missing.

The police are now set to re-interview a number of witnesses from the Ocean Club, a source close to the Policia Judiciaria said, in order to “clarify details that may be relevant to the new line of inquiry, in the light of facts we have found”.

The alleged break-in is said to have happened within days of a second burglary in the same block.

A Scottish holidaymaker said that on the first night of her stay, she and a friend returned to the flat to find their belongings and £500 worth of foreign money had been taken.

But there was no sign of forced entry at the second floor apartment and police called to the scene told the middle-aged book-keeper that they believed someone with a key was the most likely suspect, sparking concerns about security at the complex.


Among them will be ex-pat Pamela Fenn, a widow in her 70s. She claims she "scared off" an intruder who had broken into her apartment in the days before the McCanns arrived to stay in the holiday flat directly below her.

Mrs Fenn has told friends she heard a noise as she watched television and found a man escaping through her bedroom window. Her niece, [Carol Tranmer] who was staying with her, also saw the man. 

[Carol Tranmer's statement to the police did not mention anything about being present when a man entered the flat of her aunt Pamela Fenn - MMRG].

The widow reported the incident to police but claims no one contacted her after Madeleine vanished - until two weeks ago, when British detectives called on her.


‘Daily Telegraph’, 20 August 2007

Mrs Fenn has said that in the weeks leading up to Madeleine's disappearance she scared off an intruder in her apartment.

There was no apparent sign of a break-in and it is thought the man may have had a key to let himself into the flat. She will be making a formal statement today at police headquarters in the city of Portimao. There was also another burglary in the complex a few weeks before in which police also suspected the intruder had a key.


 ‘Evening Standard’ report, 21 August 2007

Headline: Burglar was on loose at Maddy resort

‘Express’ 23 August 2007

Mrs Fenn has also told police about an attempted burglary at her apartment several weeks earlier.

She said a man broke in through the first-floor window but she disturbed him and he jumped out of it.

The source said: “She did not think it was significant. She has lived in Luz for some time and at her previous address was the victim of burglaries on a regular basis.

“There are lots of drug addicts in the area who prey on tourist apartments. Nothing was taken so she did not initially report it to the police”.

The report of an intruder echoes the experience of a Scottish holidaymaker at the Ocean Club resort just three weeks before Madeleine went missing.


Pamela Fenn says: It’s all rubbish”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFHbkbBh5BM


The analysis

When did it happen? 

‘Previous week’ – Mrs Fenn

‘Two weeks before’ – Mail on Sunday

‘Three weeks before’ – Sun

‘Weeks before’ (unspecified) – Mirror

The ‘weeks before (unspecified) Madeline disappeared’ – Express, 18/8

The weeks (unspecified) leading up to Madeleine’s disappearance – Telegraph


Who was there?

‘Niece [Carole Tranmer] was there, and saw the man’ - Mail on Sunday

All other reports – no mention of her


How did the burglar get in?

The man ‘broke in’ - Mirror

‘broke in through the first-floor window' - Express, 23/8

‘No sign of a break in’ – Mirror

‘No sign of a break in’ – Express, 10/8

‘May have had a key’ Mirror

‘Let himself in with a key’ Express 18/8

‘May have used a key to the front door’ – Express, 18/8

‘Must have somehow come in through the front door’ – Express, 18/8

‘There was no apparent sign of a break-in and it is thought the man may have had a key to let himself into the flat’ – Telegraph


What was Mrs Fenn doing at the time?

‘Watching TV in the evening’ – Express, 18/8


What exactly happened?

Mrs Fenn ‘found him in her apartment’ – Express ,18/8

Mrs Fenn ‘heard a noise in her bedroom and went to investigate’ – Express, 18/8

Mrs Fenn ‘heard a noise as she watched television and found a man escaping through her bedroom window’ – Mail on Sunday

‘The man must have heard her coming and was scrambling out of the window’ – Express, 18/8

‘Disturbed him and he ‘jumped’ out of the window’ – Express, 23/8

Mrs Fenn ‘discovered a man scrambling out of the window’ – Express, 18/8

Mrs Fenn ‘disturbed him’ – Sun

Mrs Fenn ‘scared him off’ – Express, 18/8

Mrs Fenn ‘ scared him off’ – Mail on Sunday

Mrs Fenn ‘scared off the intruder’ - Telegraph

Mrs Fenn ‘found the man scrambling out of the window’ – Mirror

Mrs Fenn ‘tried to grab his ankle’ – Mirror

Mrs Henn ‘tried to grab his ankle’ - Express, 18/8

Mrs Fenn ‘was ‘terrified’' – Express, 18/8

Mrs Fenn ‘shaken up after the break-in’ – Express, 18/8

Mrs Fenn ‘just saw the back of his head and arm’- Express, 18/8

Mrs Fenn ‘tried to push him out of the window' – Express, 18/8


Did Mrs Fenn report it?

‘Yes’ (but they didn’t question her ‘again’) – Mirror

‘Yes’ - ‘shaking with fear and called the police’ – Express, 18/8

‘Reported to police’ – Express, 18/8

‘She did not think it significant’ – Express, 23/8

‘She did not initially report it to the police’ – Express, 23/8


The contradictions and questions

1 When? One week before? Two weeks? Three weeks? Several weeks?

2 Carole Tranmer there – or not there?

3 How did the burglar get in? With a key? Through the window?

4 Where was Mrs Fenn watching TV? How did he get to the bedroom without disturbing her? – via the front door, climbed through the window, or did he sneak past her whilst she was engrossed with the TV?

5 ’Phoned the police – or didn’t report it?

6 Found him already escaping?

7 Jumped out of the window, or was ‘scrambling out of the window’?

8 Tried to push him, or grab his ankle?

9 What was Carole Tranmer doing (if she was there)? We only learnt that she ‘saw’ the man

10 If he entered or left by a window, which was it? How far would he have had to jump?

11 Did he land safely? What happened next? Did anyone else hear him?


Poll Question    [See article on the main CMOMM forum -  MMRG]

Did any such burglary actually take place?


------------

For discussion, please visit this thread: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11905-was-there-an-attempted-burglary-of-mrs-pamela-fenns-flat-in-the-weeks-before-madeleine-was-reported-missing

Monday, May 13, 2019

How many more false sightings will there be of Madeleine McCann? (ARTICLE)



This article was originally published by Tony Bennett on The Madeleine Foundation website on 4 March 2010. It was written just two weeks after the McCanns had succeeded in the Lisbon High Court in finding Goncalo Amaral guilty of libeling the McCanns. The court ordered him to pay damages. 

Goncalo Amaral appealed against this draconian verdict and succeeded on appeal at the Portuguese Court of Appeal in October 2009. The McCanns in turn appealed against that decision, triggering an astounding series of appeals and counter-appeals which lasted a further eight years. Finally, in April 2017, the Portuguese Supreme Court found AGAINST the McCanns and ordered them to pay Goncalo Amaral his court costs of around £450,000.

The article has been revised and updated by MMRG on 13 May 2019 and the Madeleine Foundation has given permission for it to be republished, with amendments. 

How many more false sightings will there be of Madeleine McCann?

Article filed 4 March 2010


Where we have used translations from the Portuguese in this article, we acknowledge with gratitude the voluntary help of a group of Portuguese translators who have laboured to help us in Britain to understand the many documents released by the Portuguese police.
No-one in The Madeleine Foundation is paid anything.   

=========

This week has seen the opening up a new phase in what Mr Clarence Mitchell, the Chief Public Relations Officer for the McCanns, described on 19 February this year as the ‘complete mystery’ of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.

The new phase could accurately be described as: ‘A new series of sightings prompted by Ricardo Paiva’s admission that the Portuguese police did not follow up all the sightings of Madeleine notified to them since 2007’.

This week’s press have been full of stories about possible ‘sightings’ that were not followed up. One was in New Zealand. Another was of a ‘girl in a black wig’ seen in Portugal. We’ll look at these in more detail in a moment.

There’s no doubt that the press, ever keen to run ‘Madeleine’ stories because of the continuing public interest in what really happened to her, nearly three years after the event (and to make money), have seized on these new ‘sighting’ stories emerging from the McCann Team and their chief spokesman.

A.  The background

The sightings stem in essence from a short passage in the evidence given in an interim hearing in the libel trial in Lisbon of The McCanns v. Goncalo Amaral. Mr Amaral is the former co-ordinating and senior investigating officer on the case who wrote the book A Verdada da Mentira - ‘The Truth About A Lie’ - in which he suggested that the evidence pointed to Madeleine having died in her parents’ holiday apartment. The McCanns in July 2009 served a libel writ in the Lisbon civil courts claiming 1.2 million euros (over £1 million) damages from Mr Amaral and his publishers, Guerra e Paz. That sum was the amount of profit estimated to have been made by Mr Amaral and his publishers during the year it had been on sale. It has sold around 250,000 copies in Portugal.

The McCanns claimed that by suggesting that Madeleine was dead, Mr Amaral had seriously hindered the ongoing search for Madeleine and caused them immense emotional distress.

In September, the McCanns obtained an indefinite injunction banning the sale of Mr Amaral’s book and an associated DVD and documentary produced by TVI (a Portuguese TV channel). Mr Amaral appealed, and his appeal was heard between 12 and 14 January 2010. There was a further hearing on 11 February. On 18 February he learnt that his appeal had failed. The banning of his book stays in place until the final libel trial, expected to be listed in June or some time after.

During the hearing, one of Mr Amaral’s seven witnesses was a former colleague in the Madeleine McCann investigation, Ricardo Paiva. During his evidence, he said that there had been many sightings that the Portuguese police had not followed up, ever since the investigation was effectively archived in July 2008.  The McCanns seized on this, and demanded, through their lawyers, inspection of the details of all these ‘sightings’. The result that is that the Portuguese police have indeed released their dossier of recent ‘sightings’ to the McCanns and their lawyers, and also to the media. The media has already been awash with stories of how the ‘incompetent’ Portuguese police had allegedly failed to follow up vital leads.

But were they incompetent - and did they fail to follow vital leads?

B.  The first police report

In the interim police report by Tavares de Almeida, filed on 10 September 2007 when Goncalo Amaral was still heading up the investigation, he wrote this:

“The child’s parents immediately attributed her disappearance to the action of a third party, promoting the scenario that she had been abducted. Abduction was only one of a number of possible scenarios, but the family publicised their claim that Madeleine had been abducted in a manner that had never been seen before. On the very next day, English television stations led their broadcasts with the news of Madeleine’s disappearance. The media presented the abduction as the truth, although we were looking at other scenarios.

“As time went by, the abduction scenario was not confirmed. The abduction hypothesis did not stand up. For instance, no ransom was ever demanded in exchange for information by the alleged kidnappers or for the child herself.

“Nevertheless, and considering the evidence of one of the McCanns’ friends, Jane Tanner, we continued examining the possibility that Madeleine had been abducted. This went alongside the gathering of all kinds of information, working on a number of other possible scenarios”.

C.  The final police report

It was an unprecedented and worldwide media storm that the Portuguese police had to cope with. Suspicions that the parents might not be telling the truth ran alongside literally hundreds of ‘sightings’ of Madeleine in four dozen or more countries. This involved staff from the Portuguese police liaising with police officers in other countries and, of course, INTERPOL, so that each credible sighting could be followed up. To get a better idea of the sheer scale of the task the police faced, here is a very short extract from the final report of the Portuguese police, dated July 2008:

“We made investigations where there was news that had credibility and could have signalled the presence of the child in various locations worldwide, as well as the hundreds of enquiries carried out to confirm or dismiss them. The alleged abduction of Madeleine necessitated action by many bodies, especially the Polícia Judiciária, but also other police forces. In parallel, there was unprecedented coverage of the case in the media, both national and foreign. This was especially true in the U.K., where day after day their news at prime time included live transmissions from Praia da Luz, with many special programmes dedicated to the case.

“Some of the information had no credibility, whilst, at the other extreme, other alleged sightings required a more thorough investigation, and these are included in our Appendix. There remains a large number of supposed sightings, some receiving notable emphasis, such as those in Belgium and Morocco. These were vague or had discordant or incongruent elements, which deserved attention with a view to revisiting them in the future, should solid new information arise. In subsequent days, over 100 investigators were employed by the Portuguese Police and they received an enormous collection of diverse notifications from innumerable contacts about Madeleine’s disappearance. It required us to install a permanent police post within the Luz village. The result of such efforts is found in the documentation and the various appendices”.

The Portuguese police in their report then go on to list some of their many enquiries. Here are some examples:

a) From pages 199 onwards we have the testimony of the witness Jeremy Wilkins…He said that he saw an individual with a strange appearance behaving oddly. This was later confirmed to be a guest who helped with the search…

b) From pages 127 onwards, we give details of the sighting of a child, with a face similar to Madeleine’s, in a petrol  station. When the images from the petrol station were shown to the parents, they said without hesitation that they were not of Madeleine.

c) On page 134 we report on another sighting of a girl with a physical resemblance to Madeleine. We later confirmed it was not Madeleine.

d) In addition, an attempt was made to locate an individual known to have sexually abused  minors. Later we determined that he had left Portugal and was not in the country at the relevant time period.

e) There was an investigation into reports by Denise Beryl Ashton, page 136. She reported the presence of two individuals, whom she could not identify or recognise, who claimed they were collecting for a local children’s home, which would have been fraudulent. Although this took place on 3 May, we could not relate this to the disappearance of Madeleine. Neither did the description correspond to the sketch publicised widely in the media by the McCanns’ Chief Public Relations Officer [Clarence Mitchell].

f) On pages 40 to 144 we describe another alleged sighting of Madeleine. It was in fact another child.

g) A witness, Derek Flack (for his interview see page 200), reported the presence of a suspect, who was allegedly looking at the McCanns’ apartment, near a white truck or van, referred to at pages 145 and following. It was not possible to identify this person, despite an artist’s impression having been computer-generated. However, we believe there are very strong possibilities that they were construction workers…

h) In pages 161 to 197 we have reports from a Nuno Jesus. He told us that his daughter, who had clear similarities with Madeleine, was allegedly the victim of a kidnap attempt by a Polish couple. He provided the registration number of their hired car to the police. The couple were approached when on the point of returning to their native country. Nothing was detected that could incriminate them, see pages 214 to 216. The car and the place where they had enjoyed their holidays were analysed in a laboratory. Again, nothing incriminating was found.

i) At page 148 we describe door-to door visits to 443 houses in Praia da Luz, indicating the gigantic nature of the investigation. These places were entered and searched.

j) At pages 208 to 210 we report on a Lance Purse, who gave us a sketch of an individual similar to a sketch submitted by another witness, who didn't identify himself. At pages 211 & 212, we reported on another person brought to our attention for the sexual abuse of minors. Further enquiries revealed nothing of relevance to the  investigation…

- - - - -

By now, we’ve made the point that over 100 officers were employed investigating Madeleine’s disappearance and from the above brief reports, we can see just how thorough the Portuguese police were. The Portuguese insist that all ‘credible sightings’ were followed up.  They add:

“Within the first 24 hours, we set up an extensive operation which included  the participation of several police forces and civil protection services; in total, over 130 separate organisations were involved in this operation. After 48 hours, we had mobilised a total of over 300 police forces and public bodies…hundreds of enquiries and investigations were carried out, such as the identification of and interviewing…In addition we executed door-to-door searches in the homes and tourist resorts of Praia da Luz and surrounding areas…During the days immediately following Madeleine’s disappearance, over 700 persons who might possess any relevant information about the matter were formally or informally questioned…Over 2,000 separate enquiries were made by us. There was international co-operation, especially with Spain, the Netherlands and the UK…Any information with a major or even a minor level of credibility was explored by us, both here and abroad. We gave special attention to dozens of supposed sightings or places where Madeleine might be located, most of which, in fact, were widely publicised in the press.

“We withheld no effort in this investigation, which was probably unlike any other ever carried out in Portugal”.

D. What Ricardo Paiva said in court on 11 February 2010

After Ricardo Pavia gave his evidence in the Lisbon court on 13 January, there was a further hearing in Amaral’s appeal against the banning of his book, on 11 February. The McCanns’ Solicitor Isabel Duarte made reference in her address to the court to Paiva’s evidence. Here’s how Vanessa Allen in the Daily Mail reported it:

QUOTE

Portuguese police 'ignored hundreds of sightings' in search for Madeleine McCann: Sightings of the missing girl were filed as 'not relevant'

Portuguese police faced growing pressure to reopen the Madeleine McCann investigation yesterday, amid claims they ignored potential sightings of the missing girl. Detectives have refused to investigate hundreds of clues about the disappearance, including photographs of children said to bear a 'shocking' resemblance to the blonde youngster. They include a cluster of sightings in Italy and Spain which could hold the key to solving the mystery and ending the years of heartache suffered by her parents, Kate and Gerry McCann. But instead they have gone unchecked, marked as 'irrelevant' after the case was shelved, and left to gather dust in a police archive.

The McCanns' private detectives [Note: former Detective Inspector Dave Edgar and former Detective Sergeant Arthur Cowley], who are continuing the search for the missing child, did not even know the dossier existed until a Portuguese policeman let slip a reference to it during a legal hearing. Inspector Ricardo Paiva said police had received hundreds of tip-offs from witnesses convinced they had seen Madeleine and knew where she was being held. They sent in photographs of children and of locations which they believed were being used by her abductor, believing that police would investigate their claims. But arrogant detectives were so convinced by their own theory that Madeleine died on the night she disappeared, and that her parents faked her abduction, that they made no attempt to check the sightings.

The McCanns' lawyer, Isabel Duarte, has seen the dossier. She said every single statement had the same phrase scrawled across it: “This is not relevant to the investigation”. She said: “I was shocked at how much was in there, and that absolutely nothing had been done to follow any of it up. Every piece of information was treated the same way - Ricardo Paiva writes on it: ‘This is not relevant to the investigation’. He is the witness who declared in court that he believed Madeleine is dead. You cannot find a person when you are not looking for them”.

Mrs Duarte said they had not investigated any tip-offs since the case was officially shelved, in July 2008, when the McCanns were cleared as official suspects in the investigation. She said information had continued to pour in from potential witnesses, and even from other police forces in Europe, but it was ignored, even when there were clues including photographs of girls who looked like Madeleine.

The lawyer said: “Some of them are very, very similar to Madeleine. But Kate and Gerry had never been shown them. 'There was information from Leicestershire Police, French police, Spanish police, and again nothing was done about it. Kate and Gerry did not even know this file existed until this week. I am going to give a copy of the file to them so that their private investigation team can follow up the information in it.

“But I am angry because it is the Portuguese investigative police who should be doing this job. They have the power and the capability to do it. It is they who should be doing it, not Kate and Gerry”. Their spokesman Clarence Mitchell said they had been shocked to discover the full extent of the Portuguese police's failure to investigate Madeleine's disappearance. He said it had confirmed their worst fears about the investigation, saying: “They were shocked when they went through the file and saw what was in it, and even worse what little had been done to follow any of it up. Kate and Gerry have consistently known that potential fresh information was not being properly followed up, if at all. The tragedy of this case, which once again has been highlighted by this, is what little was done to find Madeleine. Kate and Gerry will have to do it themselves as they have been doing. They are the only ones looking for her”.

UNQUOTE

E.  A new series of ‘sightings’ are publicised

And so the McCanns, their lawyers and advisers had got hold of the file of claimed sightings, and are beginning to publicise them.

The first major one to be publicised was an alleged sighting in New Zealand. Today (4 March), however, New Zealand police said they had traced the girl in question and established that it was not Madeleine.

A witness claimed to have seen Madeleine McCann in ‘The Warehouse’ in Dunedin, New Zealand, more than two years ago. Retail assistant Taryn Dryfhout and a security guard saw the girl, with blue eyes and blonde hair, in December 2007.  Madeleine had green eyes. Ms Dryfhout said: “I was quite stricken by the wee girl who looked just like Madeleine McCann. She was quite apprehensive to talk to me and sort of stammered over her words when she was trying to think of her name”. The child eventually said her name was ‘Hailey’. No doubt the child was a bit disconcerted to be suddenly asked her name.

Ms Dryfhout said: “The man and woman with the child were a little bit suspicious”. CCTV footage in ‘The Warehouse’ showed a girl being led into a supermarket by a ‘stout’ man in shorts, while another photo in the Daily Mail showed a young girl in The Warehouse accompanied by the man and an older boy. In fact, the New Zealand police did investigate the alleged sighting at the time - but not as thoroughly as in recent days.

The publication of the girl’s image in New Zealand caused problems for her parents, who objected to her being identified in this way. Inspector Dave Campbell said: “We will not name the family nor give any further details about them. We ask that media outlets remove the image portraying the child and family from their coverage including websites to protect the privacy of the family”. Campbell also confirmed that he’d reported the alleged ‘sighting' to INTERPOL at the time - over two years ago.

A private investigator in Dunedin, Wayne Idour, said he couldn't work out why the video footage of the young girl had not been aired publicly sooner, to identify her or the man and woman she was with: “I can't work out why they haven't shown the actual moving video footage of them walking through the store. I can't work out why that has never been put to the public. That, to me, would have been the logical thing to do. You can show it in a way that you are not accusing them of anything, you are just appealing for information about their identity”.

The McCanns have frequently complained of an invasion of privacy. But here was the sudden invasion of the privacy of a New Zealand family.

There was another New Zealand sighting.  A couple from Balclutha, Michael Griffiths and Mary Habib, said they believed they twice saw a girl resembling Madeleine on the morning of 6 August last year in Dunedin, and then in nearby Milton in the afternoon. The girl was with a man aged between 35 and 40. They reported the sightings to Balclutha police later that night, and to the official Madeleine McCann website, but received no reply from either. Mr Griffiths said: "I am 80% confident it was her”, while Ms Habib said: "I am 80 per cent-plus sure”.

More alleged New Zealand ‘sightings’ of Madeleine were reported in Alexandra and Queenstown, Otago, and have been followed up.

Another previous ‘sighting’ of Madeleine was again reported this week - the case of a girl in Portugal seen with gypsies, wearing a black wig, 18 months after Madeleine's disappearance. A British holidaymaker, Jean Godwin, 56, of Widnes, said she was “100% sure it was Madeleine McCann. Her eyes were wide open and my attention was drawn to her large irises. She was about 3ft 1in and about five years of age. She was white with a pale complexion. I couldn't sleep, I had my husband take me back to look. This was a young girl, in the middle of the two women and holding the hand of each. The child was wearing what was clearly a black wig. It was short, cut in a bob style and very thick. The wig was shiny and unnatural looking and out of keeping with her very pale complexion and fair eyebrows. She was very thin and I would describe her as malnourished. Her cheeks looked gaunt. I think she had a bump on her nose”.

The child was seen with two gypsy women, referred to in many media reports this week as ‘the fat gypsy women’, in a town just 30 miles from Praia da Luz where she disappeared. One of the women was said to have been seen by another Brit tourist ‘acting suspiciously’ outside the McCanns' apartment on the day she vanished. Investigators feared Madeleine could have been ‘held in a shack at an orange grove’. Apparently the girl in question had never been traced. But in recent days, the McCanns’ private detectives say they found one of the women - a Portuguese cleaner [see below]. Jeni Weinberger, 38 (a guest, together with her husband Paul, in Praia da Luz at the same time that the McCanns were there), is said to have also identified the cleaner (Yvone Albino) as the woman she saw in Praia da Luz the day Madeleine disappeared.

[Picture: Yvone Albino, a cleaner from Silves, said to have been seen outside the McCanns’ apartment on 3 May 2007]


Detectives traced her to an isolated farmhouse on an orange grove in the town of Silves, north of Protimao. In the following months, she was seen to pay several visits to the property, a holiday home owned by a teacher, Mr Martins, and his partner, Miss Silveira. The inquiry team deemed them to be ‘suspicious’.

The investigators’ concerns were raised when they discovered a white Citroen Berlingo belonging to the couple with a child’s doll on the back seat (see below) and a child’s drawing among rubbish bags - even though the couple did not have young children. Mr Martins said that the doll was given him by students he had taught in the past.


[Picture:A doll found in the car of a couple investigated in connection with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann]

The McCann Team put out a comment that: “This is one of our strongest leads”. Another newspaper reported that “Gerry and Kate McCann were angered and shocked that the information wasn’t given to their private detectives”.

Other leads in the newly-released Portuguese police dossier include a report that ‘a small blonde girl had been dragged along the road to Faro airport’ on the night she went missing and another detailing how a young girl who appeared like the missing child was seen being held at gunpoint on a French motorway by a half-naked man in August 2008.

F.  Problems with previous sightings

There have been hundreds, probably thousands, maybe even tens of thousands of alleged ‘sightings’ of Madeleine. I even had such a moment myself, in a pub garden in Kent in the summer of 2008. A girl of around five, blonde, and with a face not unlike Madeleine’s, was in the garden, being looked after (and not very well) by two strange looking men of different ages. A few minutes later the girl, running around and not being properly supervised, went flying into a garden seat, cutting her lip badly, bleeding profusely. When they became aware, the men rushed inside to get assistance. Momentarily I thought: ‘Could that have been Madeleine McCann?’

Last year, a friend of ours - who definitely does not share my reservations about the McCanns claim that Madeleine was abducted - became convinced she had seen Madeleine on a TV programme. She’d contacted the TV programme, who had been dismissive and said: ‘It’s not Madeleine’. But she was not put off and begged me to pass on the number of the McCanns’ private investigation hotline. “There’s just that chance it could be her. I’m sure it’s her”, she said.

And there must be countless such stories. Madeleine has been ‘seen’ in Chile, on a plane to Venezuela, in Sweden, in the Philippines, in the United States.

There was the pale-looking fair-haired girl seen on the back of a Moroccan peasant woman whose photograph was splashed across British newspapers in September 2007. Even the staid hDaily Telegraph ran the picture of the woman with child on its front page with the heading: “Could this be the face of Madeleine McCann?”. Many who saw the picture thought it must be her. But of course it wasn’t, it was a relative of the peasant woman. The family found the press attention most unwelcome.

Another person who suffered a worrying moment was when a Croatian team footballer suddenly found a woman trying to snatch his two-year-old son, convinced it was Madeleine McCann. As the Daily Mail reported, when two British tourists spotted a woman leading a child with long blonde hair on the Croatian holiday island of Krk, they immediately thought it was Madeleine McCann. The couple became even more convinced that the child was Madeleine, after secretly taking a couple of photographs. One of the women grabbed the child’s arm, but only then realised the child not only wasn't Madeleine, it wasn't even a little girl. The boy's father was a well-known Croatian footballer, Dino Drpic, who plays for Dinamo Zagreb, and his mother, Nives, was a renowned glamour model. As the Daily Mail put it: “The Posh and Becks of Croatia”. They were not at all happy.

Nives said: “I started getting suspicious when the British woman approached Leone and started chatting with him. Suddenly she grabbed him by the arm, apparently thinking nobody was watching him. However, when I went over she realised her mistake and apologised”.

In September 2008, two holidaymakers were convinced that they saw Madeleine at Cala d'Or on Majorca resort, reported the sighting to local police. A British couple told police that they saw a young blonde girl matching Madeleine's description in the company of two women, both aged 40-50, who appeared to be northern European. Again the sighting was fully investigated by Spanish police.

Last year a Devon man was summoned to a local police station because someone had seen him and his eight-year-old step-daughter in a petrol garage and thought the girl was Madeleine. As it happened, she bore a very strong resemblance to the new artist's sketch shown by the McCanns on the Oprah Winfrey show four months previously. The person noted the registration number and notified the police.

Fire protection officer Jon Hazlehurst was at home when police officers arrived on their doorstep and asked them both to go to a police station. He suffered some anxious moments, saying: “I was surprised more than anything. My first thought was that it was someone pulling a prank on me before I realised that they were quite serious. I've never been called into a police station as a possible kidnapper. The police were very polite and I understood that they had to follow up the lead, even if it didn't come to anything”.

Millions of pounds worth and tens of thousands of hours of police time must have been spent the world over, following up these endless false leads, often given by people utterly convinced that they had seen Madeleine.

G.  The problems associated with looking for Madeleine

Let us assume for the moment that Madeleine really was abducted by a stranger between about 9.11pm and 9.14pm on Thursday 3 May 2007, as the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 9’ friends claim.

How realistic is it for people to carry on searching for Madeleine? The McCanns refer to the recent astonishing case of Jaycee Lee Dugard, abducted at the age of 11 and not discovered until a full 18 years later, and then only by accident. It gives them hope, they say. But being realistic, on the rare occasions that children as young as Madeleine are abducted by strangers, they are rarely found alive.

Then - in the unlikely event that the abductor, if there is one, is keeping Madeleine alive, for whatever purpose - how likely is it that s/he would be out on the streets with Madeleine for all to see? S/he would know of course that Madeleine has green eyes with a visible coloboma defect in her right eye. That would be an additional reason for keeping her out of sight.

Even if the abductor/abductress was prepared to take the risk of Madeleine being seen in public, would s/he not disguise her in some way, for example by dyeing her hair a different colour? And how difficult would it be for the abductor/abductress to keep a child, now aged nearly seven, away from public services, such as the school, and the health centre?

What would Madeleine look like now anyway?  It is not easy to project what a three-year-old will look like three to four years later. A photo-sketch has been produced which shows her to be a happy and smiling child of about 9 to 11 years of age - the one specially produced to coincide with the McCanns’ appearance on the popular Oprah Winfrey Show, televised world-wide. Does that photo really narrow down the search?

On top of all that, where are we supposed to look? We have no guidance whatsoever from the McCann Team.

And who exactly are we looking for? Over the past three years, we have been given no fewer than 14 different artists’ sketches of possible abductors, twelve of them men, and two of them women, one of them said to be a ‘Victoria Beckham look-alike with an Australian accent’.  The McCanns’ current lead investigator, former Detective Inspector Dave Edgar, said at a press conference last September that Jane Tanner, the McCanns’ friend who said she had seen a man carrying a child away from the McCanns’ apartment, ‘might have seen a woman’, not a man.

Despite upwards of £2 million and quite possibly double that spent by the McCann Team on private detective agencies, the public has not been given one single fact about who the abductor/abductress might be and where. That is perhaps not surprising when the two main agencies used by the McCanns, Metodo 3 and Oakley International, had extremely dubious track records and were both led by con-men.

Metodo 3 was led by Francisco Marco, who notoriously boasted just before Christmas 2007 that his men were ‘closing in on the abductors’ and that ‘Madeleine will be home by Christmas’. Kevin Halligen, the boss and owner of Oakley International, who replaced Metodo 3, is a hard-drinking con-man currently awaiting extradition to the U.S. on fraud charges...

 [NOTE by MMRG...Kevin Halligen was eventually extradited to the U.S. in 2012 after three years in Belmarsh top security prison in London. He was convicted of frauds amounting to $1.5 million (about £1,150,000), and spent a further year in prison after being jailed for four years. In 2017 he was found dead in a pool of blood in circumstances which suggest he could have been murdered. At the time of updating this report, no date for the Inquest on his death has yet been set - MMRG, 13.5.2019]  

Why did the McCann Team appoint such men to look for Madeleine?       

The contining search for Madeleine is, at least, a fulfilment of Dr Gerald McCann’s prophecies in June 2007. On 3 June 2007, just one month after Madeleine had ‘disappeared’, Dr Gerald McCann was already planning a ‘big event’ to mark Madeleine’s ‘abduction’. He told the press: “We want a big event to raise awareness that she is still missing…It wouldn’t be a one-year anniversary, it will be sooner than that.” Less than a month later, on 28 June 2007, Dr McCann said: “I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for Madeleine’s disappearance in the long-term”.

Many wondered at the time how Dr McCann could make a comment like that, when the world was being asked to look for Madeleine and there was always the possibility that the police might, any day, bring them news that Madeleine had been found alive. If there remained a reasonable prospect of finding her, how could you have ‘no doubt’, as Madeleine’s father did, that you could ‘sustain a high profile’ for her disappearance ‘in the long-term’.

H.  Do the McCanns and their spokesman think Madeleine is dead?

A final issue for those of us who are being asked ‘not to hinder the continuing search for Madeleine’, by querying the McCanns’ abduction claim, is the remarks made recently by Dr Gerald McCann and their Chief Public Relations Officer, Clarence Mitchell, referring to Madeleine being dead.

Interviewed in the summer of 2009, Clarence Mitchell (who now works part-time for Freud International, owned by Matthew Freud, Rupert Murdoch’s son-in-law) defended himself against accusations that he had been guilty of ‘spin’ about the disappearance of Madeleine, and then said: “Can I suggest that, actually, you quote me back accurately? I said: ‘I believe Kate and Gerry are not responsible for Madeleine’s death’.”

Months later, on 11 December 2009, at a Court hearing in Lisbon in connection with their 1.2 million euro claim against Goncalo Amaral, Dr Gerald McCann told a gaggle of reporters: “There is no evidence that we were involved in Madeleine’s death”.

So, both Dr Gerald McCann and his Chief Public Relations Adviser, Clarence Mitchell, within a few months of each other, referred specifically to Madeleine’s ‘death’.

Do they perhaps acknowledge that Madeleine is dead?

Or was it just a ‘Freudian slip’?

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

[Ends]


Original thread: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t521-how-many-more-false-sightings-will-there-be-of-madeleine-mccann-article

THE SAYINGS OF CLARENCE MITCHELL: A MASTER MEDIA MANIPULATOR

This article was originally a 6-page leaflet, mainly prepared by the Madeleine Foundation for distribution in Oxford. In March 2009, Clarence Mitchell spoke at the prestigious Oxford Union, an opportunity for him to boast about what a wonderful job he had done representing the McCanns for the past 22 months. The leaflet was widely distributed in the streets and colleges of Oxford and outside the Oxford Union.


His meeting attracted a pitifully low attendance.


Here we reproduce the leaflet, which MMRG has updated (see items in bold in brackets).


The new updates were added on 13 May 2019.  

THE SAYINGS OF CLARENCE MITCHELL: A MASTER MEDIA MANIPULATOR

This leaflet was first printed in February 2009 and revised in May 2009. It has now been updated a second time. [UPFATE: This is now the third update - MMRG]

Clarence Mitchell now works for the PR company, Freud Communications, whose boss is Matthew Freud - the husband of Elisabeth Murdoch, who is the daughter of Rupert Murdoch. Murdoch is the world’s most powerful media magnate, with major terrestrial TV, satellite and media interests in dozens of countries. So who is Clarence Mitchell and why is he employed by the world’s biggest controller of news? Find out some of the answers below.

[UPDATE: After working for Freud Communications, Mitchell worked for other companies and then also founded his own PR agency. At some stage in his careeer he joined the Conservative Party and was picked as candidate for them in the General Election in 2015, when he stood for the Brighton Pavilion constituency. The seat was won by Caroline Lucas for the Green Party. In 2019 he was nominated as a Conservative Party candidate for the European Parliament elections. He has continued to work for the McCanns, often briefing journalists. In many articles about the McCanns, he continues to be described as 'a source close to the family' or 'a family friend' - MMRG]    

A COUPLE OF QUOTES

Carlos Anjos, head of the Portuguese police professional association, who had dealings with Clarence Mitchell, said of him: “He lies with as many teeth as he has in his mouth”.

Clarence Mitchell in his own words, on 29 September 2007 to Espresso [Spanish newspaper]: “I was the head of the government's Media Monitoring Unit. Forty people work there and their function is to control what comes out in the media."

CLARENCE MITCHELL’S CAREER

Clarence Mitchell’s media career began in the late 1980s as a BBC regional reporter in Leeds. He moved to London where he covered stories about the Royals. A 2007 article on the BBC website by Laurie Margolis about him says:

“Clarence was also a presenter on various BBC news programmes, looking to make that his main career. The presenting world is a precarious and capricious one, however, and he never quite made it. Once, I was working throughout the night. Clarence was presenting hourly bulletins on BBC News 24. He did the 1am, and 2am, but at 3am a slightly dishevelled looking producer appeared doing the news. It turned out Clarence closed his eyes, sleeping through the 3am bulletin. Clarence left the BBC suddenly, becoming the Labour government’s Director of its Media Monitoring Unit at the Central Office of Information. There, his job was to ‘correct’ bad media stories about the government and to put out the government line”. A ‘spinner’, as some would say, or ‘a professional liar’ as others describe it. In May 2007 he was suddenly seconded to the Foreign Office to work as the McCanns’ chief PR man, assisting another McCann spokeswoman, Justine McGuiness. In September 2007, in an unusual move, he resigned from the civil service to become the McCanns’ full-time spokesman, on £75,000 a year. He remains in that role, though he has been employed for the last few months by another major PR agency, Freud Communications”.

Clarence Mitchell remains employed by Freud Communications, where he can be contacted. He also works part-time for the McCanns as their chief public relations officer at a salary reputed to be around £30,000 a year [SEE UPDATE ABOVE - MMRG] . No-one is quite sure who really funds that salary. Maybe the McCanns? Maybe the McCanns’ ‘Find Madeleine’ fund-raising trust? Maybe the McCanns’ benefactor, Brian Kennedy? Maybe the government? It is one of life’s little secrets.

‘AN ANGEL OF DEATH’

Margolis also noted Clarence Mitchell’s strange association with controversial murder cases: “He was closely involved with the Fred and Rosemary West case, where a murderous couple had killed young girls and buried the bodies under their patio in Gloucester. He was one of the first reporters to arrive at Gowan Avenue, Fulham in south west London, when the immensely popular BBC TV presenter Jill Dando was shot dead in a murder many feel has never been satisfactorily explained”. Mitchell also covered in depth the arrest and conviction of mass-murderer Dennis Nilson. When Paula Yates’ partner Michael Hutchence died in mysterious circumstances in the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Sydney, Australia, in 1999, Clarence Mitchell was dispatched to cover the death; more recently, in a story he worked on right up to the day he left the BBC, Clarence led coverage of the murder of the Surrey schoolgirl Millie Dowler in 2002. The case has never been solved.

Margolis continued: “Mitchell has also written books on the Fred & Rosemary West and Jill Dando cases. He also reported extensively on the murder by Ian Huntley of Soham girls Jessica Chapman and Holly Wells. On 9 January this year, the Independent ran a brief article titled: ‘Remember Clarence Mitchell?’ It said: “Clarence Mitchell, formerly of the BBC and now spokesman for Madeleine McCann’s parents, has developed a nice little niche as a spin doctor of misery. First he took on Fiona MacKeown, mother of teenager Scarlet Kelling, who was murdered in Goa. Then he started representing the parents of murdered London teenager Jimmy Mizen. And today we’ve discovered that Mr Mitchell is also speaking for the wife of Jeremy Hoyland, the British jet skier who went missing off the coast of Bali last October. Mr Mitchell is not charging for his services. But his presence can hardly be reassuring - the PR equivalent of an angel of death”.

CLARENCE MITCHELL & THE MADELEINE McCANN CASE

Clarence Mitchell has achieved much in the Madeleine McCann case. He played (according to himself) a key role in arranging for the McCanns to meet the Pope on 28 May 2007, just 25 days after Madeleine McCann was reported missing. A man with connections at the highest level, Clarence Mitchell openly boasted in a TV interview that it was he who arranged, via Roman Catholic Archbishop Cormac Murphy O’Connor, for the McCanns to visit the Pope - in what was a highly publicised visit. The Pope put pages of material about the McCanns and Madeleine on his website. But two days before the McCanns were made arguidos - ‘provisional suspects’ - in September 2007, the Pope wiped all references to Madeleine McCann from his website. Margolis wrote in 2007: “I would imagine Clarence is content in his new role as the family's voice. He's centre stage on a huge story, intimately involved as ever, and on television and in the papers all the time. It was extraordinary how, last week, his intervention seemed to eliminate within hours any misgiving about the McCanns in the British media”.

Who has been paying Clarence Mitchell’s salary whilst he has been working for the McCanns?

This remains a mystery. We know that up to September 2007, the British government paid his salary. He left the government that month. Since then, the McCanns and Mitchell have said on the record that the ‘Helping to Find Madeleine Fund’ has not paid any part of his salary. They say that he was paid by ‘an anonymous backer’. But Clarence Mitchell won’t say who that backer is, nor why that backer is giving him so much support. In article in the Independent on Sunday, 1 March 2009, Mitchell contradicted previous claims that his salary was being paid by an anonymous backer. He now says he gets a retainer of £28,000 a year from the ‘Helping to Find Madeleine Fund’, donations to which were given to ‘help find Madeleine’, not to pay the salaries of PR professionals.


Clarence Mitchell and the McCanns: 21 Issues of Concern

Here we examine 21 of the many issues that have caused people concern about Mitchell’s role in the Madeleine McCann case. At the end of our leaflet we explain how to obtain more information on the Madeleine McCann case, including our 60-page booklet: ‘What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann? - 60 Reasons which suggest she was not abducted’. [UPDATE: The sale of this booklet was banned by the McCanns in October 2009 and is no longer available for sale - MMRG] 

1. Allegedly being involved in tipping off the McCanns that the Portuguese police had been, or were going to, track their e-mails and ’phone calls

There were well-sourced reports that the McCanns were tipped off that the Portuguese police were monitoring their e-mails and ’phone calls. There was naturally concern over how this information leaked to them. A former Portuguese police officer has admitted working for the Spanish private detective agency, Metodo 3. He in turn had an inside contact in the Portuguese police who supplied Metodo 3 with information about the investigation. Clarence Mitchell was asked in an interview by Simon Israel on Channel 4 how the McCanns were tipped off. He refused to answer.

2. Being forced to deny the McCanns’ initial claim of a break-in

On the evening that Madeleine was reported missing, the McCanns claimed in ’phone calls to their relatives that an abductor had broken into the children’s room by ‘jemmying open the shutters’. This claim was reported extensively in the media. But the managers of the Mark Warners resort where the McCanns were staying, and the police, soon discovered that the shutters had not been tampered with. This forced the McCanns to dramatically change their story - one of many changes of story - to say: ‘The abductor must have walked in through an unlocked patio door”. Asked about this discrepancy, Mitchell was forced to concede on the record: “There was no evidence of a break-in. I'm not going into the detail, but I can say that Kate and Gerry are firmly of the view that somebody got into the apartment and took Madeleine out the window as their means of escape. To do that they did not necessarily have to tamper with anything. They got out of the window fairly easily”. It is however most unlikely that an abductor could have ‘got out of the window easily,’ leaving no forensic trace. The window in question was just over 2ft square and was 3ft above the ground. It was dark at the time the McCanns say Madeleine disappeared. For an abductor to have taken Madeleine through such a window, in the dark, without being seen or heard by aooyne (except the McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner), and without leaving any forensic trace, is highly unlikely.

3. Smearing Robert Murat

A curious feature of the Madeleine case was the targeting of Robert Murat, a dual Portuguese-British citizen, as a suspect. A journalist who had previously worked closely with Clarence Mitchell, Lori Campbell, suspected Murat of involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance and reported him to the Police. It is very likely that this followed conversations between Mitchell and her. Three of the McCanns’ close friends, the so-called ‘Tapas 7’, also reported seeing Robert Murat close to the McCanns’ apartment the evening Madeleine went missing, a claim he denied. The McCann camp made a concerted attempt, for whatever reason, to smear Murat. Clarence Mitchell himself played a key role in this: He told one newspaper:

“An outcome similar to Holly and Jessica [Soham children murdered by Ian Huntley] is possible. I don't want to, and I can't, talk about Robert Murat, but some journalists who worked with me in Soham, and that were now in Portugal, saw resemblances between that case and Robert Murat. And I won't say more”. He was very lucky that Murat did not sue him for libel, since in 2008 Robert Murat collected a reported £600,000 in libel damages from news media and journalists whom he claimed had smeared and libelled him. [UPDATE: Further research by MMRG in the past 10 years has led to a far better understanding of the role of Robert Murat in relation to Madeleine's disappearance. We now know there are several indications that something serious may have befallen Madeleine on Sunday 29 April, four days before she was reported missing. A 'phone call was made to Robert Murat the following day [Monday 30 April] and is beleived to have been a request for him to return urgently to Praia da Luz. He flew over the very next day at 7am from Exeter Airport. Whatever he really did those first three days in Praia da Luz (1 to 3 May), he comprehensively lied to the Portuguese Police about his movements, when first questioned on 15 May. He was made a formal suspect on that occasion. After the police examined his mobile phone records and found out that he had been lying, he was requestioned - and proceeded to give a wholly different account of his movements. Who can tell if even that was true. There is much much more about the role of Robert Murat in several articles on CMOMM - MMRG].       
    
4. Being forced to retract his claim that ‘Madeleine is probably dead’

During early 2008, Clarence Mitchell was forced to concede that ‘Madeleine is probably dead’. This caused grave embarrassment for the McCanns, who were determined publicly to maintain that Madeleine was still alive. His statement could also have had serious implications for the Helping to Find Madeleine Fund, which could only continue to operate and keep asking for donations on the premise that Madeleine was still alive. Dr Gerald McCann was forced to publicly rebuke his PR chief by insisting on his blog two days later that they remained hopeful that Madeleine was still alive.

5. Failing to explain that the ‘Helping to Find Madeleine Fund’ was not a charity

Interviewed by James Whale, Mitchell repeatedly refused to correct Whale when he referred to the McCanns’ fund as a ‘charity’. In fact, the Helping to Find Madeleine Fund is registered as a ‘private trust’; its aims are not charitable and include making payments to the McCanns. It only has to make annual returns to Companies House. Beyond that, the Trust is not accountable to anyone.

6. Asking people to send money in envelopes to ‘Gerry and Kate, Rothley’

Asked on the same James Whale show how people could contribute to the fund, Mitchell said: “Just put money into an envelope and send to Kate and Gerry McCann, Rothley, it’ll get there”. That was unprofessional - monies should have been directed to the registered office for the Fund, namely London Solicitors Bates, Wells & Braithwaite. For example, monies sent in the post could be stolen en route or would not be properly accounted for.

7. Claiming that the Fund was ‘independently controlled’

Pressed about control of the ‘Helping to Find Madeleine Fund’, Clarence Mitchell claimed that the Fund was ‘independently controlled’. This is untrue. The Trust’s Directors consist mainly of members of the McCann family and their friends or acquaintances.

8. Retreating on whether or not the McCanns would take a lie detector test

The McCanns were anxious to convince the world that they were telling the truth about how Madeleine had suddenly gone missing. To bolster their claim, Clarence Mitchell announced: “Kate and Gerry McCann would have no issue with taking a lie detector test”. However, two months later, after a number of lie detector experts came forward to offer their services, he announced: "Of course they are not going to take any lie detector test”.

9. Making a film for TV about the McCanns’ distress ‘one year on’ whilst at the same time claiming the McCanns were not doing so

Clarence Mitchell told the media: “The McCanns don't want to do anything about 'woe is us a year on'. That is what the tabloids would like us to do, but we are not following their agenda, we are following our own agenda” (one of many references to ‘our agenda’). Weeks later, there was a two-hour long pre-recorded TV interview: ‘Madeleine McCann - One Year On’, clearly prepared long before his public statement, and certainly with his personal knowledge. And the programme was very much: “Woe is us a year on”.

10. Issuing a ‘Crimewatch’-style video clip with a description of an abductor

It has always been the McCanns who have given out descriptions of a possible abductor. The Portuguese police from early on doubted the truthfulness of claims by Jane Tanner, one of the McCanns’ ‘Tapas 7’ friends, that she had seen an abductor. In early 2008, Clarence Mitchell announced that the McCann Team were looking for a moustachoied man seen in Praia da Luz around the time Madeleine went missing. He did this in a widely-shown video clip in which he acted like a Crimewatch presenter. At a meeting at the London School of Economics on 30 January 2008, this performance, plus his commanding stance and choice of words, prompted one member of the LSE audience to ask: “Are you the police?” There was much laughter.

11. Claiming that “…whatever the Portuguese police might find in their investigation, the McCanns will have an innocent explanation for it”

To this bizarre statement, Mitchell added the equally strange comment: “There are wholly innocent explanations for any material that the police may or may not have found”, prompting many to ask: “How could the McCanns and Clarence Mitchell know in advance what the police might find and know that there would be ‘an innocent explanation’ for everything?

12. Claiming it didn’t matter if Dr Kate McCann changed her clothes on 3 May

One of the key issues in the Madeleine McCann case is whether the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 7’ friends have been telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth about the events of 3 May 2007, the day Madeleine was reported missing. In late 2008, a French journalist, Duarte Levy, claimed to have seen photos taken that evening conclusively proving that Dr Kate McCann had left the table during the evening and changed her clothes. That would blow a hole in her claim that she was at the Tapas bar the whole evening. She would have had to explain why she changed her clothes. Mitchell’s official response to these claims was: “So what if she did leave the table and change her clothes?” He refused to elaborate.

13. Saying that ‘none of the Tapas group’ were wearing watches the night Madeleine went missing - and then being forced to retract that statement

Clarence Mitchell had come under pressure from journalists to explain why there were so many significant contradictions between the McCanns’ and the Tapas 7’s versions of events on 3 May 2007, when Madeleine ‘disappeared’. There were also many discrepancies in their timelines. Mitchell tried to explain, responding: “None of them were wearing watches or had mobile phones on them that night”.

Those journalists then confronted him with the sheer unlikelihood that all nine had neither watch nor mobile ’phone, pointed out that the McCanns and others had used their mobile ’phones that night, and produced pictures of the McCanns and their Tapas 7 friends taken in Praia da Luz that week which showed that they were always wearing watches.

Clarence Mitchell was forced into an embarrassing retreat, conceding: “Some of them were wearing watches and had mobile ’phones, some of them weren’t”. It is also now known from the McCanns’ statements to the police, which have been publicly released, that the McCanns both had mobile ’phones with them that evening. As their official spokesman, Mitchell must surely have been briefed on this before he made his statement.

14. Falsely claiming that the McCanns had been ‘utterly honest and utterly open’

On 11 April 2008, Clarence Mitchell made this bold claim: “Kate and Gerry have been utterly honest and utterly open with the police and all of their statements from the moment that Madeleine was taken”. He later said, referring to himself and the McCanns: ‘We have nothing to hide’. When addressing a largely student audience during what were called ‘The Coventry Conversations’, Mitchell said: “We are always willing to co-operate with the Portuguese police”. These were bold claims to make given that…
· Dr Kate McCann was asked 48 questions by the Portuguese police when interviewed on 7 September 2007 and refused to answer any of them.
· The McCanns had refused point blank to take part in a reconstruction of the events of 3 May 2007, the night Madeleine McCann was reported missing.
· The McCanns’ statements contained numerous changes of story, contradictions with the accounts of others, evasions and apparent obfuscations.

15. Claiming it would be ‘hugely entertaining’ to devise a cast list for a proposed film about Madeleine going missing

On 7 January 2008 it was widely reported in the media that the McCanns and their advisers were in talks with media and film moguls IMG, who made the film ‘Touching the Void’, about a possible film about Madeleine’s disappearance. Clarence Mitchell was asked whether Gerry and Kate would play themselves in any film or if their roles would be played by celebrity actors. He said: “It may be hugely entertaining and a bit of fun to speculate on a cast list, but we are a million miles away from that sort of thing”. On another occasion, he said of Madeleine: “If she is dead, she is dead”. These and other comments made some wonder how much ‘feel’ or concern for Madeleine’s welfare and fate Mitchell really had.

16. Claiming it was a British cultural custom for parents to put children to bed early so they could enjoy the rest of the evening

Interviewed by Irish TV station RTE, Clarence Mitchell tried to explain why the McCanns left three young children under four on their own, several nights in a row, whilst on holiday, and dining out for the evening. He told his TV audience: “There is a cultural difference between Britain and Portugal. It is a British approach to get your children washed, bathed and in bed early in the evening, if you can, so you can have something of the evening to yourself. That’s the British way of doing things. It doesn't mean it's wrong. It doesn't mean it's right”. Many British parents objected strongly to Mitchell’s description of them..

17. Trying to deny that the McCanns had left the children alone every night

In an interview with Jon Gaunt of TalkSport, Clarence Mitchell was trying to explain why the McCanns had left their children alone ‘that night’ (i.e. the night of 3 May when Madeleine was reported missing). He was quickly corrected by Gaunt who reminded him: ‘But they left them alone every night’. Mitchell had no answer.

18. Blaming Romany gypsies for abducting Madeleine

Clarence Mitchell on one occasion pointed the finger of suspicion at Romany gypsies for having abducted Madeleine. It appeared he had no basis whatsoever for smearing this group of people. He has never apologised for making it.

19. Using an image of Mari Luz without her parents’ permission

Months after Madeleine went missing, another child, Mari Luz, went missing, though in very different circumstances. Sadly she has since been found dead. The McCanns printed posters of Madeleine together with Mari Luz - without gaining the parents’ prior permission. Her parents were very upset, and complained. Clarence Mitchell reacted by stating: “It’s a shame that they are complaining about us in a press release. How can they be angry with is for wanting to help when all we’re trying to do is find their own daughter?”

20. Being ‘encouraged’ that Madeleine ‘may have been abducted by paedophiles’

In early 2008, stories were put about by an unknown Portuguese lawyer, Marcos Alexandre Aragao Correia, that Madeleine McCann had been abducted by paedophiles, raped, murdered and her body dumped in a dammed lake. At the time, a new drawing of a possible abductor was released, and part of the Arade Dam was searched. A friend of the McCanns was quoted as saying: “We fear that a group of two or three paedophiles may have been fishing around the apartments, casing them with a view to taking children".

Mitchell then commented:

“Developments such as this give Mr and Mrs McCann renewed hope. That is exactly the sort of call we want. We think the image [of the suspected abductor] is of such a quality that anyone who knows him will be able to identify him. Kate and Gerry are quite buoyant at the moment - every time we do something like this and move things forward it gives them strength. We’re very encouraged by this - putting all this information out, these images out, is helping Gerry and Kate in one way; simply by doing it we have got some momentum and are pushing the agenda forward on our side of the equation”.

Many asked why Mitchell and the McCanns could use such words as ‘buoyant’ and ‘encouraged’ in relation to Madeleine’s having possibly been raped and murdered by paedophiles.

And his use of the word ‘agenda’, yet again, once more prompted the question: What was their ‘agenda’?

21. Explaining why the McCanns deliberately left their three children alone again the night after Madeleine and Sean had been crying the night before

On SKY News, Clarence Mitchell was interviewed, following a pre-recorded interview with the McCanns in which they admitted, for the first time, that two of their children had been crying on the night before Madeleine went missing. There was public outrage that the McCanns were told by their children that they had been crying the previous night whilst they were dining out, only to then leave them alone again the very next night. The SKY News presenter asked: “Why did Kate and Gerry choose to leave the children the same way the very next night?” Clarence Mitchell’s reply is instructive. Here it is in full:

“That is one interpretation. Let me put it in context. On the morning of May the 3rd, the day Madeleine later went missing, she came out, and said to Gerry and Kate at breakfast, very briefly as an aside, in no way was she unhappy or crying and then, in no way was she reprimanding her parents as some reports papers have wrongly, er, said. She simply said: “Why didn’t you come see - come and see me and Sean when we were crying, last night?”, and Kate and Gerry were puzzled by that, because in their checks - they had been checking her every 25/30 minutes, the same as they did the next night, when she went missing - they had found nothing to suggest that she was in any way distressed or upset, they found her asleep each time.

“There was nothing wrong. Rachael Oldfield, one of their friends, was in the apartment next door, in the room adjacent to Madeleine’s bedroom. She too was there all evening and heard no crying through the walls. There was nothing to suggest this had happened. So it was a puzzle to Kate and Gerry when Madeleine mentioned it. They tried to question her about it, and she just walked off laughing, and, er, happy, she was [note the past tense] a child and she and, and so, so she dropped it. Now they of course had a serious discussion about what had possibly gone wrong and they decided to check her more thoroughly that next night, and that’s what they did. And in the context of ‘leak’...came from a Spanish journalist known to be very sympathetic to the McCanns.

“What happened later - her disappearance - they felt that that conversation, puzzling as it was, was very important to bring to the police’s attention. They wonder why, if she cried, why she cried. Was something, or someone already in that room to make her cry and they fled when she cried? Who knows? They can’t prove that, but they told the police in confidence - legally protected documentation has been in those files for 11 months - and why does it appear on the very day they were at the European Parliament? Somebody in the police doesn’t want Kate and Gerry to widen the agenda [that word again!], for whatever reason. It’s wrong. It’s illegal, and the Portuguese government needs to stop this…from happening in the future”

During this long reply, we see the master media manipulator at work.

He makes light of two children crying while their parents were not with them.

He justifies the McCanns’ decision to go out dining with their friends and leaving all three children alone again the very night after the children told them of their crying.

He claims, without evidence, that the police leaked the story about the McCanns’ children crying on their own the night before.

He claims the police have done something illegal.

Some might admire him as a master of his craft, and indeed one writer has already said that the McCanns’ public relations campaign will for years to come be ‘a textbook example of how to control the media and manipulate public opinion’.

But, we may ask, if this is true, whose interests has Clarence Mitchell been serving? Is he someone who is genuinely helping us get to the truth?

Or is it just possible that this person who once boasted that his job was ‘to control what comes out in the media’ is someone who does his best to stop us getting to the truth?

MORE INFORMATION

There’s also a wealth of information about the McCann case at other sites, we’d recommend in particular:

· www.mccannfiles.com  [UPDATE: This excellent website closed many years ago - MMRG]
· www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk   [UPDATE: This website can now be found at: www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk = MMRG] 
· http://themaddiecasefiles.com/  [UPDATE: This website has been closed to new members for many years - MMRG] 

-----------------------------------------------------------

Published by The Madeleine Foundation,
January 2010

Friday, May 10, 2019

What was the connection between Kate and Gerry McCann and the late paedophilia ‘expert’, Ray Wyre?


RAY WYRE AND THE MCCANNS

What was the connection between the McCanns and the late paedophilia ‘expert’, Ray Wyre?



by Tony Bennett, Secretary of The Madeleine Foundation
filed 10 October 2010

This article is copyright, but copyright is waived if the source is given
when reproducing or quoting from it: Berne Convention rules apply


In early 2008, the McCanns met Ray Wyre and his wife. The People told us about a meeting the four of them had, at the Wyres’ Buckinghamshire home, probably in January 2008, though the date of the meeting was not given.

Less than six months after meeting the McCanns, and aged only 56, Ray Wyre died, apparently from a stroke.

Summary of Wyre’s career

As a Guardian obituary on 8 August 2008 noted, he was famous as a ‘sex therapist’ for sex offenders, including paedophiles. Edward Marriott, who wrote the Guardian obituary, stated: “He was one of the world's leading experts on sexual crime. He pioneered the treatment of sex offenders in residential therapy settings, believing that the potential for change existed within every criminal and, most importantly, that this work was crucial in reducing the risk of further offending”. That is certainly how many people saw him. But as to whether it is an accurate summary, this article will explore. The full article can be found in an Appendix below (Appendix 3). The headline to the article ran: “Trailblazing therapist with a unique approach to sex offenders”. That is perhaps much more correct, as we shall see in more detail below. But in ‘blazing a trail’, did he start not a few forest fires which proved difficult to put out?

He was best known for setting up his Gracewell Clinic for Sex Offenders, in 1988, having for many years previously been employed by the prison service as a Probation Officer to work with sex offenders, notably in Albany Prison from 1981 to 1986. However, the Gracewell Clinic closed in 1993, partly through local objections to so many paedophiles being housed under one roof. His successor clinic, the Wolvercote Clinic in Surrey, also closed, in 2002.

After this, he set up Ray Wyre (UK) Ltd., based in Milton Keynes, where he lived with his second wife, Charmaine. He claimed to provide services to ‘accused sex offenders and their families’. He and his associates were regularly called in to provide ‘expert evidence’ in criminal cases in the U.K. and beyond. He had become an internationally recognised expert on sex offences and treatment methods.

Wyre frequently gave TV interviews, where he was described as a ‘sexual abuse consultant’, and was so much sought-after that he commanded huge fees for speaking at conferences and giving lectures to police officers, government policy-makers and diplomats, among many others. Whether he can realistically be called an ‘expert’, however, is one of the issues we explore in this article.

‘Paedophiles can be treated’

Wyre was a fervent believer - contrary, one must say, to the preponderance of the evidence - that paedophiles could be turned into non-paedophiles by therapy. He once said: “People say that abusers don’t deserve therapy and that they should be locked up and the key thrown away. But these people are forgetting the children. We are not working for the offender but for the children, because they never defend themselves”. His comments were much later echoed by Jim Gamble, the man who for four years headed up the newly-established Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (CEOP), until he controversially handed in his notice on 4 October 2010. Despite heading CEOP for four years, and purporting to be a fervent opponent of child pornography on the internet, Gamble once notoriously pontificated that some offenders who viewed child pornography could be effectively ‘let off’ by accepting a formal police caution.

Ray Wyre’s interest in the disappearance of Madeleine McCann

Ray Wyre’s connection with the McCann case began no more than days after the McCanns reported Madeleine missing.

Madeleine was reported missing at around 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May 2007. Less than a week later, the Daily Telegraph published a lengthy article penned by Ray Wyre on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. It contained the remarkable statement that, quote: “It was clear from the beginning in Portugal that we were dealing with an abduction…” He thus echoed the statement of Dr Kate McCann - which she has never explained - that she knew ‘instantly’ that Madeleine had been abducted. Pressed by interviewers to say how she could be so sure, she answered, in terms: “I can’t say because the strict judicial secrecy laws surrounding an investigation will not allow me to”. But since the investigation has been archived, she has never clarified what made her so certain that Madeleine had been snatched by an abductor. One is reminded also of the statement of Clarence Mitchell, on being asked why he agreed to be sent from his post as Head of the government’s Media Monitoring Unit to Praia da Luz to manage the McCanns’ public relations. He said he had been ‘assured’ that this was truly a case of abduction. He didn’t say who assured him. But that assurance was good enough for him to rush out to Praia da Luz in May 2007.

Wyre, having in his mind established that it was ‘clear’ that this was an abduction, then launched into an immediate attack on Portugal and its criminal justice system for harbouring paedophiles.

He wrote: “What was [the abductor’s] motivation? How would he initiate contact and target the child? How would he control the environment to evade discovery? Portuguese police cannot ignore the UK's experience in such cases. In the early '90s a British paedophile group filmed the sexual abuse of Portuguese boys. At one stage the Americans were so concerned about the role of British paedophiles in Portugal that I was approached about the targeting of schools there. International co-operation should be part of police thinking. However, there is no culture of community policing in Portugal and they have laws that prevent the discussion of cases. This is clearly the wrong way round”.

Once again, Wyre appeared to be echoing the line put out by the McCann Team right from the word ‘go’ - namely, that Madeleine had been snatched by a predatory paedophile. Equally, and again in tune with the message from the McCann Team, Wyre took an early opportunity to have a dig at the Portuguese police.

The article (reproduced below) by Wyre appeared in the Telegraph on the morning of Thursday 10 May. When was the article actually written?

The article would have to have been commissioned by the Telegraph editor. Then Wyre would have to write it. He would have to send the article to the Telegraph editor - and one of his staff would have to check it. No doubt it would have been slotted into the paper by a sub-editor during the previous day, Wednesday 9 May, if not before.

It is quite possible therefore that Wyre wrote this article only two or three days after Madeleine was reported missing. At that time, hundreds of Portuguese residents and tourists, and hundreds of police officers, were combing the area looking for Madeleine. There were suggestions that she could have ‘wandered off’. There was hope that she could be found.

We might well ask why Wyre was so adamant that Madeleine had been abducted, and why he was already speculating that Madeleine had been taken by a paedophile. It almost seems like he was in a rush to get his ‘take’ on the situation across, despite how soon it was after Madeleine was reported missing.

The article is important and I’ll now reproduce the full Telegraph article:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

What the Portuguese police must do


Daily Telegraph - By Ray Wyre - 10 May 2007

Last Updated: 2:06am BST 10/05/07

I have worked with men who have abducted and killed children. Often, their capture has failed to save the child and has not come about through good police work.

The planning needed to take the child cannot be overestimated. It was clear from the beginning in Portugal that we were dealing with an abduction and the need to "think offender" was essential.

What was his motivation? How would he initiate contact and target the child? How would he control the environment to evade discovery?

Portuguese police cannot ignore the UK's experience in such cases. In the early '90s a British paedophile group filmed the sexual abuse of Portuguese boys.

At one stage the Americans were so concerned about the role of British paedophiles in Portugal that I was approached about the targeting of schools there. International co-operation should be part of police thinking.

However, there is no culture of community policing in Portugal and they have laws that prevent the discussion of cases. This is clearly the wrong way round. The media are essential in passing co-ordinated and directed information to the community.

In this case, speculation is rife, confused messages are likely to be given.

The parents will be feeling guilty for leaving the children and even a half hour is a long time if a child wakes up and starts to cry immediately after one leaves the room.


This could, possibly, lead to a woman on her own, who has lost a child, saying to herself wrongly that the parents did not care for this child and deciding to take the girl home. No paedophile, no conspiracy - just a lonely woman.

The window of opportunity for the abductor means that the information given by the parents has to be very accurate. Police must help them to say exactly how long it was since they last saw their child.


The parents need to know that if this was an offender who planned the abduction then there is probably nothing they could have done.

I once asked an abductor who had killed girls how we could stop him. He said: “I suppose you would have to chain a child to the mother”. But he added: “No, that would not work. I would take both”.

Ray Wyre is an expert in sexual crime who worked in the UK Probation Service in the 1970s before specialising in programmes for sex offenders.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Wyre quoted in The Times, 7 May 2007

Three days before this, Wyre had also been quoted in an article in The Times, by Dominic Kennedy.

The article, titled: “Nothing can stop a determined abductor, but there is a chance the child is still alive”, opened with this paragraph:

If Madeleine McCann was abducted by a paedophile, there is a chance that she is still alive and can be saved by sensitive policing, according to Ray Wyre, a sexual crimes consultant. ‘Lately, there have been more and more cases where there has been an element of planning and an attempt to keep the child alive’, he said. Wyre added that: ‘To maximise the possibility of finding Madeleine alive, police must avoid doing anything to make the kidnapper panic. If he believes that they are about to move in and catch him, he may become so alarmed that he kills the child to stop her being a witness’.”.

Wyre was also quoted in the same article in relation to the activities of paedophiles in Portugal. He continued:

“Portugal is known to attract British paedophiles. A ring of 20 Britons set up there around 1990, filming sex acts with local boys and sending the tapes to Belgium and the Netherlands. Some were later jailed in England. The case helped to persuade the British Government to make it illegal for Britons to have sex with underage children abroad”.

The Times article concluded: “Mr Wyre went to Lisbon and became involved in the aftermath of that investigation. ‘There were still lots of connections and other things going on’, he said. ‘There have always been British paedophiles operating in Portugal’.

The McCanns meet Ray and Charmaine Wyre

Now let’s move to The People article of 27 January 2008, and, before commenting, I’ll reproduce that in full as well:

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

QUOTE:

EXCLUSIVE: MCCANNS ARE 'TOTALLY INNOCENT'

EXCLUSIVE TRUTH ABOUT THE McCANNS: BY TOP UK CRIME CRACKER

The People - By Marcello Mega and Daniel Jones


Daniel.Jones@People.Co.Uk
27 January 2008


Kate and Gerry played NO part in the disappearance of their daughter Madeleine, one of the world's top crime experts declared last night.

Ray Wyre - who has given Cracker-style testimony to courts since the 1970s - said: “It is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for them to have been involved”. He insisted the grief-stricken parents were incapable of doing anything to harm their children.


He told how the couple feared Maddie was dead in the hours after she vanished - the first time their initial anguish has been revealed. And he heaped scorn on claims the McCanns are being torn apart by the tragedy, adding: “They are a close and loving couple”.

Wyre spoke out as it was revealed Portuguese cops now believe four-year-old Maddie may have been abducted - as Kate and Gerry have always claimed.

The couple met Wyre, 56, to discuss setting up an international taskforce to help cops trace missing children.


They poured out their hearts to him and his wife Charmaine over dinner at the ace criminologists's home in Milton Keynes, Bucks.

Wyre - who's helped nail a string of monsters including child-killer Robert Black - said: "I was with them for several hours and I could not help but apply some of the practices I use when I'm carrying out assessments of suspects for police and the courts.

“I can state categorically there is no way they were involved in their daughter's murder or disappearance. They would be incapable of such an act. I have more than 30 years' experience in this field and am used to people trying to hide dark secrets.

“There was NO sign of any such deceit. It is absolutely impossible for them to have been involved”.

And Wyre paid a moving tribute to the way the 39-year-old couple manage to think of other people even though their hearts are broken.
He said: “It was humbling and moving to meet the McCanns. They brought flowers for my wife, which brought tears to our eyes. You consider what they've been through and they still bring flowers when they come to your home”.


Wyre hit out at shocking claims of eating disorders and marriage rifts made about Kate and heart specialist Gerry, whose twins Sean and Amelie have just turned three.

He said: “It can't have helped while they've had this massive tragedy on their hands. Days before we met I was reading an ill-informed article saying they were growing apart. But they are a close and loving couple who are certainly united in their roles of being good parents to the twins and maintaining momentum in their quest to find Madeleine.

“There is no doubt they are a couple - they are together and they support and comfort one another. They were very warm and friendly to each other and there was no sign of dispute between them. During the meal, Gerry often put his arm round the back of Kate's chair. They were affectionate to one another all the time. They looked very much together. As for any suggestion Kate might have an eating disorder, it's nonsense. She sat down to my wife's home-made lasagne and garlic bread with a smile and really enjoyed it. And she tucked into the banoffee pie for pudding like the rest of us”.

Wyre told how for 72 hours after Maddie vanished in Praia da Luz on May 3 last year the McCanns were certain their daughter was dead.


Their despair has never been made public before - and Wyre blasted critics who insist they have not expressed enough grief.

He said: “For three days, all they could see in their minds was Madeleine lying dead. They were in complete agreement she'd been taken by a predator, abused and killed.

“They were certain they would never see her alive again. The image of her lying murdered hardly left them and they expected at any time to receive the news that her body had been found. When three days passed and that had not happened, they began to feel the stirring of hope.

“They reasoned it was most likely that if someone had seized her to abuse and kill her, her body would probably have been nearby and would have been found. They continue to cling to that hope - but they are also prepared for the worst. However, as long as she remains missing I know they will not rest in their efforts to find her”.

Wyre also told The People how GP Kate is so dedicated to answering the flood of emails she gets every day about Maddie she sometimes gets up at 4am to deal with them all.

His tribute came as detectives in Portugal finally admitted they could be WRONG in their belief that the McCanns - from Rothley, Leics - were involved in Maddie's disappearance. Prosecutors had named the couple as official suspects in September.

And since then police have been hellbent on trying to prove Kate and Gerry had hidden their daughter's body after the youngster died in their Algarve holiday apartment.

Investigators even claimed they had enough evidence to charge the couple just three weeks ago. But yesterday police sources admitted the McCanns may have been telling the truth all along. And detectives are now set to review the case and quiz all the witnesses again.

The amazing about-turn comes after a British laboratory said DNA tests carried out on blood samples found in the Praia da Luz flat and the couple's hire-car had been inconclusive.

The theory Maddie had been kidnapped was also given another boost last week with the release of a sketch of a possible suspect. A source told Portuguese newspaper 24 Horas: “There are now two hypotheses on the table - abduction or accidental death. There are no concrete proofs to charge the current suspects. No line of inquiry can be discounted - but the first hypothesis is the most credible”.

The McCanns' family spokesman Clarence Mitchell told The People last night: “We welcome any movement on the part of the police that accepts Madeleine was abducted - because that's what happened.

“It’s ridiculous we've had to wait this long for any indication they believe Kate and Gerry are telling the truth.

“The sooner the police realise they don't have a case against them, the sooner they focus on finding Madeleine - which is what this investigation should be about”.

UNQUOTE

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Analysis of The People article - The context in which it came to be published

Let us first examine the context of this article and try to understand how it came to be written and published. We will start with a recap of what had been happening during the previous months.

In August and early September there was a spate of stories, especially in the popular British press, about the evidence of the cadaver dogs, and about forensic reports from the Forensic Science Service in Birmingham that were said to confirm that Madeleine’s DNA had been found in blood and body fluid samples in the McCanns’ holiday apartment and in the car they hired three weeks later. The cadaver dog Eddie, trained by one of the world’s leading dog handlers Martin Grime, was said to have identified 10 locations connected with the McCanns where a corpse had lain. The McCanns came up with at least five different version of how this scent of a corpse might have been detected by the springer spaniel.

Then, on 7 September 2007, the McCanns were taken in for questioning and made ‘arguidos’, or suspects. Three days later a senior detective, Tavares de Almeida, issued a damning interim report which pointed clearly to the main line of enquiry being that Madeleine had died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club, Praia da Luz, and that the McCanns or others must have hidden her body. Just three weeks after that report was issued, the detective inspector in charge of the case, Goncalo Amaral, was removed from his position by fax and ordered to report to another location.

The McCanns and members of their team, especially after the trauma of being questioned under caution, were understandably engaged in an active campaign to win the support of the media, and to progress the investigation in what they felt was the right direction. Their fervent supporter, Cheshire businessman Brian Kennedy, who had made his pile from selling double glazing, appointed the highly controversial Spanish detective agency Metodo 3 to investigate Madeleine’s disappearance. They said the Portuguese police were not looking for her properly. The McCanns and Brian Kennedy, using publicly-donated funds paid to their trust, Find Madeleine Fund, had handed Metodo 3 a contract reputed to be worth at least £50,000 a month.

The involvement of Metodo 3 led to stories just before Christmas from its Director, Francisco Marco, that his men were ‘closing in on’ Madeleine’s kidnappers and that Madeleine would be ‘home by Christmas’. These stories were complete and utter fabrications - being perpetrated by Metodo 3 who were in turn being funded by donations from a generous British public.

Metodo 3 were not finished. In January and March 2008, still under contract to the McCanns, they appear to have been behind some highly-publicised searches for Madeleine’s body in the Arade Dam. These were organised amid a fanfare of publicity and media photographers by Madeira-based Portuguese lawyer, Marcos Aragao Correia. Correia later admitted to being paid by Metodo 3, claiming, unconvincingly, that he had ‘only been paid expenses’. This at least made a change from his original story, which was that he was doing it ‘out of the goodness of his own heart’.

Whilst on the subject of Correia, we should note the following. He was also the lawyer who acted against Goncalo Amaral, accusing him of taking part in or authorising a beating of a convicted murderess, Leonor Cipriano. Moreover, he came up with two sick stories about what had happened to Madeleine. When he first came to public notice, he told the world that within three days of Madeleine being reported missing, ‘underworld sources’, whom he could not name, had told him that Madeleine had been abducted, raped, killed and that her body had been thrown into a lake. Several months later, he admitted that this was a lie. He changed his story, replacing it with an equally unconvincing account that on Saturday 5 May, two days after Madeleine was reported missing, he had attended his first-ever Spiritualist meeting. After that meeting, he said he had a disturbing vision of a very large man strangling Madeleine. Such a man was the pursuer of the detective Goncalo Amaral, and employed by the McCanns via Metodo 3.

Meanwhile Brian Kennedy had been busy. He had been contacting various witnesses. According to an article by Mark Hollingsworth in the Evening Standard in August 2009, he even intimidated some of them into keeping silent and not talking to the Portuguese Police. He found two witnesses, however, who were willing to talk. They were Paul Gordon and Gail Cooper. Both claimed they had seen a strange, ‘creepy’ man when they had been in Portugal in the weeks before the McCanns were there. The stories about these two ‘sightings’ of a creepy man were released by the McCann Team on different days to achieve maximum press coverage, in a blaze of front-page publicity, on 7, 8 and 9 January - round about the time the McCanns were meeting with Ray and Christine Wyre.

The Daily Mirror first of all reported: “A Brit who stayed in the same holiday flat as Madeleine McCann has told how he spotted creepy strangers lurking nearby BEFORE she vanished. Paul Gordon said he was worried the dodgy-looking people had no business to be at the Portuguese complex. His shock evidence could mean child-snatchers had been staking out the complex before four-year-old Maddie's family even arrived there. Brewery executive Paul, 34, and his family rented the Ocean Club flat in Praia da Luz for a fortnight last April. The McCanns took it over from them and Maddie went missing five days later on May 3 - sparking a global hunt”.

Two days later, the Mirror filed a new story: “A second British tourist has reported seeing a mystery man hanging around Madeleine McCann's holiday flat just days before she vanished. Gail Cooper, 50, said she was confronted by the ‘creepy’ stranger at her holiday villa in Portugal. He claimed he was collecting for an orphanage in the next village of Espiche. She spotted him again two days later on Praia Da Luz beach.

“Gail, from Newark, Notts, said yesterday: ‘He was a horrible-looking man, really creepy, unkempt and dirty. He definitely wasn't Portuguese. He scared me’.”

To assist Gail Cooper’s recollections of what this man looked like, Brian Kennedy had in the previous weeks paid for an ‘F.B.I.-trained forensic artist’, Melissa Little, to help her mock up a sketch of him. The media blitz of 7-9 January had been well planned. The decisions of both Paul Gordon and Gail Cooper to talk to the McCanns’ private detectives seems to have originated in meetings between them and Brian Kennedy.

As we have said in our major article on Robert Murat (see under ‘Articles’ on our website, www.madeleinefoundation.org.uk ), these stories had a dubious origin and content. And in the end the Portuguese Police dismissed these claims, especially Gail Cooper’s as she changed her story about how many times she had seen this man. The Portuguese Police published this conclusion about Gail Cooper’s unreliable evidence in their final report, a full copy of which is reproduced in our latest book, ‘The Madeleine McCann Case Files, Volume 1’ (ISBN 978-0-9563351-1-1), available via our website.

Kennedy had also been busy having secretive meetings in Portugal. He took staff of Metodo 3 to meet the Portuguese Police in Portimao on 13 November. The same day he met with the leading suspect in the case, Robert Murat, each flanked by their respective lawyers, Edward Smethurst and Francisco Pagarete. Around this time, Jane Tanner was gradually - and in public, via the press - shifting from her earlier identification of Robert Murat as the person she said she had seen carrying a child outside the McCanns’ apartment on the day Madeleine disappeared. Now, she was saying, she was no longer sure.

Ray Wyre praises the McCanns

Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns’ chief public relations officer, was busy promoting stories about Madeleine day after day. Without a shadow of a doubt, he will have been behind the appearance of that article on 27 January 2008 in The People which featured the meeting between the McCanns and the Wyres.

He would have known about the meeting, if not actively arranged it. He would have known that Ray Wyre would be willing to talk to The People and that The People would publish details of their meeting. The People’s circulation, in common with many other parents, had been falling. They would have jumped at the chance of an ‘exclusive’ on Madeleine McCann – which is exactly what they got, probably at a price. Mitchell would no doubt have ‘vetted’ the final content - and, as we have seen, he was actually quoted in the article. He may even have drafted the article himself.

Against that background, let us summarise the content of the article about the McCanns’ trip to the Wyres’ home in Buckinghamshire.

First, we note that Wyre doesn’t refer to the McCanns’ children. Presumably they were left at home for the day with a relative or child-minder.

Then we observe one of the most striking features of this article: the insistent, repeated and total certainty of Wyre that the McCanns were 100% innocent and knew absolutely nothing about what had happened to Madeleine. Wyre is quoted as saying, in quick succession:

"it is absolutely IMPOSSIBLE for them to have been involved"

"they are incapable of doing anything to harm their children"

"I can state categorically there is no way they were involved in their daughter's murder or disappearance"

"they would be incapable of such an act".

We notice also in The People article how Ray Wyre is elevated to near divine status by a series of hyperbolic statements about him:

‘top UK crime cracker’

‘helped nail a string of monsters including child-killer Robert Black’

the ‘ace criminologist’.

Then we hear of the claim that the real purpose of the meeting was ‘to set up an international taskforce to help cops trace missing children’. Given that we have had INTERPOL for decades, it is reasonable to ask whether the purpose of the get-together was a lot more about getting a very helpful front-page article in a national Sunday newspaper than to set up a rival organisation to INTERPOL. Was this meeting, indeed, arranged by Mitchell solely to produce a great newspaper headline?

The article says: “Wyre also told The People how GP Kate is so dedicated to answering the flood of emails she gets every day about Maddie she sometimes gets up at 4am to deal with them all”. Only months later, though, as we now know from Johan Seend of Virginia-based company iJet, the McCanns set up a telephone information hot-line intended to field calls from the general public. We now know that the McCanns did not follow up even one of those calls (see our article on Kevin Halligen on our website) - one of many issues which we say should be addressed in a full public enquiry into all aspects of Madeleine’s disappearance.

The People article also neatly linked into the recent fanfare of publicity about another suspect. They wrote: “The theory Maddie had been kidnapped was also given another boost last week with the release of a sketch of a possible suspect. There are now two hypotheses on the table - abduction or accidental death. No line of inquiry can be discounted - but the first hypothesis is the most credible”.

This enabled Clarence Mitchell to have the final say: “The McCanns' family spokesman Clarence Mitchell told The People last night: “We welcome any movement on the part of the police that accepts Madeleine was abducted - because that's what happened”.

One detail The People omitted, however, was whether Ray Wyre had ever met either of the McCanns before.

The controversial career of Ray Wyre

It is time now to examine the career of Ray Wyre. We have seen how in articles in The Times on 7 May and the Daily Telegraph on 10 May, he spoke forthrightly in the British press of his conviction that this was ‘definitely an abduction’, just days after Madeleine disappeared. Then, months later, as we have just seen, he went on to say that he was sure from his experience that it was ‘absolutely impossible’ for the McCanns to have been in any way involved in the disappearance of their daughter. The People described him in their article as a ‘top UK crime cracker’ and ‘ace criminologist’. Was he?

There is a fair amount of material on the internet about this controversial sex therapist-cum-consultant. Readers are referred for example to these four links or sources:

]http://www.achillesheel.freeuk.com/article13_2.html

]http://www.redguitars.co.uk/fbga/aLiveWyre.php

THE "NOTTINGHAM, UK" RITUAL ABUSE CASES by Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance

‘The Making of a Satanic Myth’, http://www.smwane.dk/content/view/189/28/

http://www.faascotland.co.uk/A%20live%20Wyre.htm


CONTINUED...

Popular Posts