Letter from PeterMac (MMRG) to The Rt Hon Priti Patel: OPERATION GRANGE - REPORTED DISAPPEARANCE OF MADELEINE BETH MCCANN

8th October 2019

The Rt Hon Priti Patel, PC, MP

Home Secretary

Madam,

OPERATION GRANGE - REPORTED DISAPPEARANCE OF MADELEINE BETH MCCANN

 

I am a retired Police Superintendent, Operations Commander, with CID and other investigative experience.  I have studied this case for 12 years, in conjunction with experts in various fields.

I refer to the recent report by Sir Richard Henriques of his review of Operation Midland.

"Sir Richard, who was commissioned to review the investigation by the Metropolitan Police in February 2016, concluded:

“The principal cause of the many failures in this investigation was poor judgement and a failure to accurately evaluate known facts and to react to them. 

“A major contributing factor was the culture that ‘victims’ must be believed. 

“Whilst the responsible Officers assert that they kept an open mind, several failures can only be explained by an unwarranted and disproportionate belief in ‘Nick's’ credibility.”

The review said that major inconsistencies between Beech’s accounts, a lack of corroborating evidence and overall “implausibility” was not properly challenged.”     [ Link supplied below]

It is evident that Operation Grange may have fallen into the same trap of poor judgement, specifically

   • has failed to accurately evaluate known facts, and to react to them

   • has followed the culture that the ‘victims’ [the McCanns] must be believed

   • has not had an open mind, but has had an unwarranted and disproportionate belief in the ‘McCanns’ credibility’

   • has not taken account of the major inconsistencies between the McCann’s and their holiday friend’s and other witnesses’ accounts;  of the lack of corroborating evidence;  and further that the overall ‘implausibility’ of the account has not been properly challenged.

The Operation seems deliberately to be ignoring the points of evidence against the ‘official account’.    The most notorious of these include the alerts by the British blood and human cadaver detection dogs; the clear evidence of forgery of the photo of the family by the pool;  the exposing of the original untruths about forced and broken shutters; the total lack of evidence of entry, presence and exit; the impossibility of the alleged regular checking system; bizarre and contradictory statements from the parents themselves about the ‘comfort blanket’ and the pyjamas . . .  and a plethora of others.   The list is too long even to append here.  Not one has been explained or refuted.  

Operational Policing is clearly not within the immediate responsibility of the Home Secretary.

The continued funding of Grange over eight years at a cost of at least £ 11.6 million (2018), however, is.  

(By contrast Operation Midland lasted only 16 months, and cost a relatively insignificant £2.5m)

The position of PM Mrs May, might have been compromised by her decision whilst Home Secy. to receive Dr Kate McCann at a Downing Street reception, and to introduce her as a ‘victim’ to Royalty.  [Link below]

PM Mr Cameron, might similarly have been compromised by his decision to write personally to the McCanns in terms inappropriate during an investigation into a missing child, when it is established fact that in over 85% of cases the close family or friends are ultimately shown to have been involved and should therefore always be treated as prime suspects.  Met. DCI Colin Sutton turned down the opportunity to lead Grange after learning that the investigation was going to be very narrowly focused, and away from the McCanns or their friends, contrary to his oath, his professional duty, his experience and his training.  [Link below]

Professionals from several fields have expressed serious doubts about the path the investigation is following, and serious commentators across the world have presented reasoned and evidenced thoughts about many aspects of the case and its investigation, some presented as challenging documentaries

It is clear that PM Mr Cameron, having inherited the poisoned chalice of the involvement of Government and the Security Services from Blair and Brown, was also put under intolerable pressure to set up Operation Grange given the threats against Mrs May, as Rebekah Brooks admitted at Leveson.

We do not believe that your position has been compromised in any of these ways.

I note that in a refreshingly robust and professional manner you have already instructed Sir Thomas Winsor to conduct an inspection of the Metropolitan Police, but observe that Operation Grange is a tightly focussed issue, stemming from the involvement of a previous Labour PM, Blair, and his Chancellor, Brown, (the reason for whose involvement is far from clear.)

On 10 October 2016 I sent a full letter with several appendices of evidence and references to your predecessor The Rt Hon Amber Rudd PC,MP,  with copies to Mr Cameron, and to the Met. Commissioner.

Several dossiers of fully referenced evidence and analysis have been sent direct to Grange, and a formal document with appendices of relevant and incontrovertible evidence was sent to the Portuguese Attorney General, and to the Polícia Judiciária  (PJ).  [Link below]

All have acknowledged receipt.

Retired Portuguese DCI Dr Gonçalo Amaral, the original SIO in the case, who wrote the book in which he referred to political involvement which has been endorsed by the Supreme Court in Portugal as an honest account and consistent with the evidence, has also been kept informed of our research.

We can provide duplicates on request.

In light of the above, may I as a tax-payer be assured that any money allocated to Operation Grange is devoted to a proper search for the truth and to justice for a little British girl, or that Sir Thomas be instructed to focus on Grange as a priority in his wider assessment of the work of the Metropolitan Police

I remain, Ma’am

Yours sincerely

Peter Mac

BSC, LLB, MA

Member of the Hon.Soc. Middle Temple

Retired Police Superintendent

Nottingham Police. 1972-2000

Refs:

Henriques Report

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/carl-beech-operation-midland-review-henriques-report-met-police-a9142856.html

Letter to the Portuguese Attorney General

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15959-letter-to-portugal-the-disappearance-of-madeleine-mccann-new-evidence-of-what-happened-to-her?highlight=key+lines+of+evidence+against

DCI Colin Sutton

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4467832/Met-interested-proving-McCann-parents-innocent.html

E-Book, referenced chapters dealing with individual aspects of the ‘evidence’

http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/

DCI Dr. Amaral’s book - in translation

https://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.com/

Home Sec. Mrs May, Duchess of Gloucester, and principal suspect, Dr Kate McCann,

Reply received today (8/11/2019)

HMI and NAO have looked at it . . .

So that means one of several things

that the conspiracy goes right to the heart of every organisation involved

Or, possibly, and this will not be popular, that Grange is actually doing something . . .

Related link: Response to my letter from National Audit Office

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t16520-national-audit-office-re-public-spending-for-operation-grange

Richard D. Hall: Gambling with Paedophiles (and an appeal)

Another excellent 'Madeleine' film from the Richard D. Hall collections, all of which can be found here: http://www.madeleinefilms.net/

At the end of this 'Gambling with Paedophiles' film, Richard puts out an appeal for someone who has an excellent command of both the English and Portuguese languages who can translate accurately English into Portuguese. The MMRG are looking to put Portuguese subtitles into Richard's films. Fee to be negotiated. We already have someone who has volunteered to do the editing work for us, we just need a translator.

If you can be of assistance to us, then please contact Richard at richard@richplanet.net, or Tony Bennett at ajsbennett@btinternet.com

Many thanks

Jill Havern
Forum owner The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™

Did Madeleine McCann die on Sunday 29th April 2007, four days before she was reported missing? Strong evidence that she did.

A short paper by the Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG)

The Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG) was set up in 2009, around the time that I created what was to become the most popular Madeleine McCann discussion forum on the internet: ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’ (CMOMM). https://jillhavern.forumotion.net

Seven years later, we are just two months away from the likely closure of Scotland Yard’s investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance, known as Operation Grange.

Many were hopeful that this investigation, begun in May 2011, would lead to the truth about Madeleine’s disappearance being established, and to the arrest and conviction of the persons responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance.

These hopes have been dashed.

Over the past seven years, MMRG members have contributed to the vast amount of research that has been pursued on CMOMM, and our publications have been published there.

CMOMM has a section on its forum titled: “McCann Case: The most important areas of research’. https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/f57-mccann-case-the-most-important-areas-of-research

New research in this section points to Madeleine’s death being on the Sunday or Monday and not Thursday 3rd May.

We now wish to take this research a stage further, and below is a short paper expressing the views of the Madeleine McCann Research Group.

Jill Havern, forum owner

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

The views of the Madeleine McCann Research Group, August 2016

Before we explain our conclusions in detail, we have over the years seen many fine researchers come and go on the forum. Some of those who have followed the Madeleine McCann case for years have begun to despair of the truth ever being discovered, while other forum members have complained of ‘going over the same minutiae over and over again and getting nowhere’.

This is emphatically not how we see it. On the contrary, since the astonishing BBC Crimewatch programme in October 2013, which was yet one more recycling of the same old McCann Team’s account of how Madeleine was allegedly abducted, there has been renewed interest in the case, and in the forum, and some very productive research has been carried out, in which we have played our part.

We feel we are now able to set out some key findings about what really happened to Madeleine McCann. In doing so, we are supported to a greater or lesser degree by many of the finest Madeleine McCann researchers, both on the forum and elsewhere.

In this short paper, we set out our key findings and the reasons for them. We also try to deal head-on with the main objections to our theory.

We adopt as excellent summaries of the main lines of evidence: (1) the interim Portuguese police report of Tavares de Almeida dated 10 September 2007 and (2) the book ’The Truth of the Lie’ published in July 2008 by Dr Goncalo Amaral.

http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.co.uk

However, and with the very greatest respect, the force of evidence means that we must part company with them on the date of Madeleine’s death, which both de Almeida’s report and Amaral’s book say occurred within four hours of her being reported missing. We explain in this paper why her death must have been earlier.

The claim that Madeleine had died - and died days before the McCanns reported Madeleine was abducted - has been very starkly set out in the third of three films by film-maker Richard D Hall: ‘When Madeleine Died?’. We agree with the central claims of his films and now wish to add more specific conclusions on where the evidence leads.

https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t12362-new-film-by-richard-d-hall-when-madeleine-died

We believe that there are a considerable number of people who know what really happened to Madeleine but will not speak of what they know. Until they do speak, we will never know everything. But we believe we now have sufficient knowledge to be able to state with confidence what we say below. That knowledge is derived from multiple sources and is based on the voluntary efforts of many people, not least those who have set up websites of information and discussion about the case, voluntary Portuguese- English translators and so many others who have given freely of their time and expertise.

Our views are unlikely to change unless significant new evidence emerges.

Here are our main conclusions:

1. There is no doubt that Madeleine died on that holiday

The 17 alerts by two cadaver dogs, used by dog top handler Martin Grime, to the odour of a corpse and to blood or body fluids, in locations associated with the McCanns or on their clothes, is prima facie evidence that Madeleine died (or was killed) in the McCanns’ holiday apartment. No-one else was reported to have ever died in that apartment.

That conclusion is greatly enhanced by the McCanns’ first and subsequent reactions to these dramatic findings, which we have set out in detail elsewhere. When they were told that the smell of death and blood had been found in their apartment and hire car, they hurriedly came up with a series of improbable explanations for this: 

1. blood spatters on the walls could have been caused by mosquitoes crashing into the wall

2. Madeleine had nosebleeds

3. Madeleine has grazed her knee climbing up the steps to the aeroplane

4. The dogs has alerted to rotting meat, not the odour of a corpse

5. The dogs had alerted to dirty nappies, not the odour of a corpse

6. Kate McCann had certified six deaths in the two weeks before going on holiday, that’s why the‘smell of death was on her clothes’

7. Kate McCann used to carry Madeleine’s favourite cuddly toy, ‘Cuddle Cat’, to work with her whilst she visited homes to issue death certificates, that’s why the smell of death was on Cuddle Cat. 

Later, the McCanns completely changed their tune. Kate McCann said that the dogs were only alerting to the conscious or unconscious signals from the dog handler, Martin Grime, a claim that basically accused Martin Grime of gross professional incompetence.Gerry McCann tried to claim that cadaver dogs, and sniffer dogs generally, were ‘incredibly unreliable’. He tried to prove this by quoting from a legal judgment in the United States, in the case of Eugene Zapata, accused of murdering his wife. A cadaver dog had alerted to the odour of a corpse which suggested that Eugene Zapata had moved his wife’s body twice. A judge refused to hear the dog handler’s evidence, saying that sniffer dogs’ evidence was too unreliable. Gerry McCann gleefully quoted this case to try and prove his claim that cadaver dogs were unreliable. Just months after this, Eugene Zapata made a full confession which proved that the cadaver dogs’ evidence had been 100% correct. Despite this, Kate McCann had the effrontery to mention this case in her 2011 book on the case, ‘madeleine’. However, she (of course) failed to mention that the dog had been right all along.

The initial DNA samples taken from the body fluids discovered in the McCanns’ apartment and in their car showed a 99.99% certainty that they belonged to Madeleine McCann. However, a subsequent review of the samples determined that they had been ‘contaminated’ by government Forensic Science Service staff. They then said that the samples could have been from Madeleine but also that this could not be stated with any certainty.

The conclusion that Madeleine died on the holiday is also strongly supported by a wealth of circumstantial evidence. To even list, let alone explain, all the circumstantial evidence would take pages. It includes such things as:

A A huge number of contradictory statements by the McCanns, their friends (David and Fiona Payne and Fiona’s mother Dianne Webster, Russell O’Brien and Jane Tanner, and Matthew and Rachael Oldfield), and others closely associated with them.

B Numerous changes of story by the McCanns, their friends, and others closely associated with them.

C Kate McCann’s refusal in an interview under caution to answer any one of 48 questions put to her by the police

D In the same interview, she was asked a 49th question: “Are you aware that in not answering these questions you are jeopardising the investigation into your daughters disappearance?” Kate McCann answered: “Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks”.

E Spending vast sums of money - much of it from the public - on expensive lawyers (including Michael Caplan QC, the top barrister who successfully stopped General Pinochet being extradited to Chile) and PR advisers, when none of these could have realistically helped to find Madeleine

F The McCanns’ body language, including their obvious lack of raw emotion after the loss of their first child



Madeleines’ 4th Birthday – Just 9 days after her parents reported her disappearance and claimed that she had been abducted by a paedophile gang.

G Analysis of their statements, which inadvertently reveal many clues about what really happened to Madeleine

H The huge involvement of the government and security services in this case, including Gordon Brown’s personal interventions in the Portuguese investigation at the request of Gerry McCann, and the involvement of MI5, Special Branch, and the government-backed Control Risks group. Tony and Cherie Blair also gave personal support to the McCanns, while David Cameron set up the five-year-long Metropolitan Police investigation into Madeleine’s reported disappearance. Operation Grange, which has cost around £13 million but has got absolutely nowhere

I The appointment by Tony Blair of his most senior PR officer, Clarence Mitchell, the Director of the Media Monitoring Unit at the Central Office of Information, and responsible directly to the Cabinet Office, to head up the government’s PR initiative in support of the McCanns. This support continued even after the McCanns became the Portuguese police’s prime suspects when the McCanns were arrested and made official suspects on 7 September 2007. Mitchell once boasted that his job was to ‘control what comes out in the media’. He most certainly has done that in the Madeleine McCann case.

J The McCanns refusing to give their holiday photos to the police. Instead, they used the Head of Risks at PR company Bell Pottinger, Alex Woolfall, and their cousin, Michael Wright, to edit, crop and delete photographs from the McCanns’ memory cards before they were given to the police, on 9 May. They refused to hand over their photographs without first selecting exactly what they wanted the police to see and what they didn’t want them to see. In addition, the Portuguese police appear to have received the images on a black-and-white program which only reproduced them as grainy ‘greyscale’ images which made them very difficult to analyse.



K Employing disreputable and dishonest private investigation agencies, such as Metodo 3 and Oakley International. Some of the men the McCanns employed were out-and-out crooks, like Antonio Giminez Raso from Metodo 3 and Kevin Haligen of Oakley International, both of whom spent four years in jail for crimes, respectively, of corruptly assisting a major drugs gang, and major fraud. In addition, Antonio Giminez Raso was caught bribing people in Morocco to falsely claim that they had seen Madeleine. These bogus stories were then fed to the media. In early 2009, Brian Kennedy, the Cheshire businessman who led the McCann Team’s private investigations, helped to create a bogus private investigation company, ALPHAIG Ltd. He did this to create the entirely false impression that two former police officers he employed for a period, Dave Edgar and Arthur Cowley, were lead detectives of a company called Alpha Investigations Group. This impression was wholly false.

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id362.html.

L Arranging two bogus week-long searches of a dam in Portugal, the Arade Dam, pretending that they knew nothing about this search, when in fact they had paid a lawyer, Marcos Aragao Correia and men form Metodo 3 to conduct the search.

M Deliberately creating stories about claimed ‘sightings’ of Madeleine which they knew to be false.

N Within weeks of reporting Madeleine’s disappearance, the McCanns planned events to mark her disappearance, far in advance. For example, on 3 June 2007, just one month after Madeleine went missing, Gerry McCann was planning a ‘big event’ to mark Madeleine’s ‘abduction’, telling 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.” He wanted Elton John to front a major fund-raising concert. Less than a month later, on 28 June 2007, Dr Gerry McCann said: “I have no doubt we will be able to sustain a high profile for Madeleine’s disappearance in the long-term”. How very true, over nine years later, has that prophecy come true.

All of these circumstances simply serve to confirm the alerts of the dogs and show that the McCanns’ account of events was not correct and that Madeleine was NOT abducted.

To read the rest of this article please visit this thread on the CMOMM forum: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t16047-what-s-the-evidence-that-madeleine-died-on-sunday-29-april

What really happened to Madeleine McCann? - was she killed on Sunday 29th April 2007?

by Ray_Sneek for MMRG on 25.05.17

The views of the Madeleine McCann Research Group, August 2016


The Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG) was set up in 2009, around the time that Jill Havern set up what was to become the most popular Madeleine McCann discussion forum on the internet: ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’ (CMOMM).

Seven years later, we are just two months away from the likely closure of Scotland Yard’s investigation into Madeleine McCann’s disappearance, known as Operation Grange.

Many were hopeful that this investigation, begun in May 2011, would lead to the truth about Madeleine’s disappearance being established, and to the arrest and conviction of the persons responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance.   

These hopes have been dashed.

Over the past seven years, MMRG members have contributed to the vast amount of research that has been pursued on CMOMM, and our publications have been published  there.

We have seen many fine researchers come and go on the forum. Some of  those who have followed the Madeleine McCann for years have begun to despair of the truth ever being discovered, while other forum members have complained of ‘going over the same minutiae over and over again and getting nowhere’.

This is emphatically not how we see it. On the contrary, since the astonishing BBC Crimewatch programme in October 2013, which was yet one more recycling of the same old McCann Team’s account of how Madeleine was allegedly abducted, there has been renewed interest in the forum and some very productive research carried out, in which we have played our part.

We feel we are now able to set out some key findings about what really happened to Madeleine McCann. In doing so, we are supported to a greater or lesser degree by many of the finest researchers, both on the forum and elsewhere, into matters related to Madeleine’s disappearance.

In this short paper, we set out our key findings and the reasons for them. We also try to deal head-on with the main objections to our theory.

We adopt as an excellent summaries of the main lines of evidence: (1) the interim Portuguese police report of Tavares de Almeida dated 10 September 2007 and (2) the book ’The Truth of the Lie’ published in July 2008 by Dr Goncalo Amaral.

However, and with the very greatest respect, the force of evidence means that we must part company with them on the date of Madeleine’s death, which they say occurred within four hours of her being reported missing. We explain in this paper why it must have been earlier.     

We believe that there are a considerable number of people who know what really happened to Madeleine but will not speak of what they know. Until they do speak, we will never know everything. But we believe we now have sufficient knowledge to be able to state with confidence what we say below. That knowledge is derived from multiple sources and is based on the voluntary efforts of many people, not least those who have set up websites of information and discussion about the case, voluntary Portuguese- English translators and so many ofhers who have given freely of their time and expertise   

Our views are unlikely to change unless significant new evidence emerges.

The claim that Madeleine was killed - and killed days before the McCanns reported Madeleine was abducted - has been very starkly set out in the third of three films by film-maker Richard D Hall: ‘When Madeleine Died?’. We agree with the central claims of his films and now wish to add our conclusions on where the evidence leads. Here they are:

1.   Madeleine was killed

The 17 alerts by two cadaver dogs, used by dog top handler Martin Grime, to the odour of a corpse and blood or body fluids, in locations associated with the McCanns or on their clothes, is prima facie evidence that Madeleine died or was killed in the McCanns’ holiday apartment. No-one else was reported to have died in that apartment. That conclusion is greatly enhanced by the McCanns’ first - and subsequent - reactions to these dramatic findings.

The initial DNA samples taken from the body fluids discovered in the McCanns’ apartment and in their car showed a 99.99% certainty that they belonged to Madeleine  McCann. However, a subsequent review of the samples determined that they had been ‘contaminated’ by government Forensic Science Service staff. They then said that the samples could have been from Madeleine but also that this could not be stated with any certainty.     

The conclusion that Madeleine was killed is also strongly supported by a wealth of circumstantial evidence in the form of a swathe of contradictory statements and changes of story by the McCanns, their friends, and others closely associated with them. She was therefore NOT abducted.  

To even list, let alone explain, all the circumstantial evidence would take pages. It includes such things as

A Kate McCann’s refusal in an interview under caution to answer any one of 48 questions put to her by the police

B Spending vast sums of money - much of it from the public - on expensive lawyers and PR advisers, when none of this could have realistically helped to find Madeleine 

C The McCanns’ body language, including their obvious lack of raw emotion after the loss of their first child

D  Analysis of their statements, which inadvertently reveal many clues about  what really happened to Madeleine 

E The huge involvement of the government and security services in this case

F The appointment by Tony Blair of his most senior PR officer, Clarence Mitchell, the Director of the Media Monitoring Unit at the Central Office of Information, and responsible directly to the Cabinet Office, to head up the government’s PR iniative in support of the McCanns. He once boasted that his job was to ‘control what comes out in the media’.

G The McCanns refusing to give their holiday photos to the police. Instead, they used the Head of Risks at PR company Bell Pottinger, Alex Woolfall, and their cousin, Michael Wright, to edit, crop and delete photographs from the memory cards before they were given to the police. They refused to hand over their photographs without first selecting exactly what they wanted the police to see and what they didn’t want then to see

H Employing disreputable and dishonest private investigation agencies, such as Metodo 3 and Oakley International. Some of the men the McCanns employed were out-and-out crooks, like Kevin Halligen and Antonio Giminez Raso, both of whom spent four years in jail for crimes, respectively, of fraud and corruptly assisting a major drugs gang.

I Arranging two bogus week-long searches of a dam in Portugal, pretending that they knew nothing about this search, when in fact they had paid a lawyer, Marcos Aragao Correia and men form Metodo 3 to conduct the search.          

J Deliberately creating stories about claimed ‘sightings’ of Madeleine which they knew to be false. 

K Planning events to mark Madeleine’s disappearance far in advance …


2.   How was Madeleine killed?        

We cannot say. However, in our view it could not have been a simple accident, otherwise the McCanns would have taken her to the local hospital. 

We suggest, given what we know, that there are two realistic possibilities:

[*] a deliberate violent act against her (not necessarily by one of the McCanns) , or
[*]death due harmful medicine or drugs.
There are indications which point in either of these directions, but not enough information to say which..     
 
3.   Madeleine could not have been killed after 6pm on Thursday 3 May

Tavares de Almeida and Goncalo Amaral suggested Madeleine might have had a fall and been killed as a result of that fall - after 6pm on Thursday 3 May. But those who claim that Madeleine died after 6pm have to explain how the McCanns were able to do all the following – and more - within the four hours between 6pm and 10pm (when the alarm was raised) on Thursday 3 May.

• decided not to inform the authorities of her death
• planned to remove her body from the apartment
• got Madeleine’s twin brother and sister out of the way when all of this was going on (Note: those who say Madeleine died after 6pm never seem to discuss whether the twins knew she had died and how the McCanns kept them out of the way)
• told their Tapas 7 friends what had happened
• somehow carried Madeleine’s body out of their apartment
• found, within a miraculously short space of time, a place to hide her body
• successfully hid her body in a place where no-one has ever found it
• sat down calmly for dinner at about 8.30pm to 8.45pm as if nothing had happened.
  In addition, for Martin Grime’s cadaver dogs to have alerted to the scent of a corpse, no longer present, some three months after the McCanns had vacated their holiday apartment, Madeleine’s body must have been lying in the McCanns’ apartment for at least 90 minutes, probably two hours or longer .

4.   What indications do we have about when she was killed?

This issue was very fully addressed in Richard D. Hall’s third film about Madeleine McCann: ‘When Madeleine Died?’  Without necessarily agreeing with every specific point he makes in that documentary, we adopt his main conclusions, so far as they go.  The following are some of the main factual issues we have taken into consideration in arriving at our conclusion that Madeleine McCann was killed on Sunday 29 April:

[*]  The complete absence of any of Madeleine’s DNA in Praia da Luz                             
No DNA of Madeleine was found in the McCanns’ apartment, nor on her clothes nor on objects she had used or come into contact with on holiday, e.g. towel, pillow, bedding, hairbrush and toothbrush. This is consistent with her having been dead for some time before she was reported missing. It would also be consistent with the apartment having been forensically cleansed before the alarm was raised and Madeleine’s clothes and other items having been removed or disposed of.
[*]The absence of any genuine photographs of Madeleine taken after lunchtime on Sunday 29 April (see also below)
We know for certain that three photographs were taken of Madeleine playing happily in the Ocean Club playground in Praia da Luz in the late afternoon or early evening of the first day of the McCanns’ holiday - Saturday 28 April (this disposes of the views of some people who have claimed that Madeleine was never on that holiday). There is good evidence that the so-called ‘Last Photo’ of Madeleine was taken at lunchtime on Sunday 29 April and not at lunchtime on Thursday 3 May as claimed by the McCanns. Only one other photo of Madeleine was taken that week, the so-called ‘Tennis Balls Photo’. There is real doubt as to whether that is a genuine photo of Madeleine.
[*] Severe doubts about the evidence given by the McCanns and two Mark Warner creche nannies, Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington, regarding a ‘high tea’ at around 5pm-6pm, which Madeleine is said to have attended on Thursday 3 May
It was the strong conviction of Dr Goncalo Amaral and his team of investigators that, based largely on the evidence of Catriona Baker, Madeleine was alive and present at a high tea at the Tapas restaurant on 3 May 2007.  Catriona Baker was in sole charge of the ‘Lobsters’ creche of seven children (including Madeleine) the week the McCanns were in Praia da Luz.
Amaral and his team (rightly) rejected all claims by the McCanns that Madeleine was alive after 6pm on 3 May because, obviously, they were made by someone who was not ‘independent’. He and his team also (rightly) rejected claims by Dr David Payne that he saw all three of the McCanns’ children alive on a visit he and Kate McCann said that he had made to the McCanns’ apartment at about 6.30pm on 3 May. Not only was Dr Payne not independent, being a very close friend of the McCanns, but there were 20 or more significant contradictions between the accounts of Dr Payne and Kate McCann about what took place at that meeting, how long it lasted etc.
We do not set out here all the multiple contradictions about the alleged ‘high tea’ on 3 May; these have been more than adequately analysed in many places on the internet. We are sure that this ’high tea’ did not take place; the contradictions about it are too many and too serious.
All other claimed sightings of Madeleine on 3 May are equally unproven and open to serious doubt.          
[*] The absence of any undisputed confirmed sightings of Madeleine on or after Monday 30 April
Here we rely mainly on the analyses by long-time McCann researcher ‘HideHo’, who has examined all claimed sightings of Madeleine from Monday onwards, and found each one to be either vague, otherwise unsubstantiated or uncorroborated, or subject to contradictory  evidence. We refer in particular to her article on CMOMM on the lack of credible evidence that Madeleine was seen alive after Sunday, link here:
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11921-was-madeleine-seen-after-sunday-no-credible-evidence-that-she-was-watch-the-video?

[*]Multiple contradictions and inconsistencies in the accounts of the McCanns and their friends about  the events of that week from Monday onwards
This was confirmed in Kate McCann’s own book on the events of that week, which did nothing to remove all the question marks about the many contradictions and inconsistencies about what really happened that week. These have been fully analysed on CMOMM over the past few years.   
[*]The unconvincing and vague evidence given by creche nanny Catriona Baker about what Madeleine was actually doing in the crèche all week
Her accounts lack any real detail of what Madeleine actually did in the creche that week. Besides that, the times shown for Madeleine being in the creche do not even agree with what Kate McCann says in her own book about the events of that week.
[*]Clear evidence that the McCanns’ pattern of behaviour changed after Sunday in the following ways:

1. Taking breakfast every day in their own apartment and not with their friends in the restaurant
2. Similarly, taking lunch every day in their own apartment and not with their friends in the restaurant
3. Never being seen out together with the twins from Monday onwards
4. The McCanns using different doors when entering and leaving their apartment.

All of these, we say, are wholly consistent with something very serious having happened to Madeleine McCann on the Sunday.
[*]The problem with the ‘Tennis Balls Photo’
The ‘Tennis Balls Photo’ purports to be a photograph of Madeleine collecting tennis balls from a tennis court where adults have just been playing tennis. It is said to prove that she was alive and well on the Tuesday that week. There are however multiple problems with the authenticity of this photo. Not least is the fact that it is claimed not only that two different people took the photo, but also that it was taken on two different days. Other problems with the photo have been discussed in many places on the internet. We do not therefore accept it as evidence that Madeleine was alive on Tuesday.         
[*]Evidence that the children of the McCanns and their friends were cared for in one room from Sunday night onwards
After Dr Amaral was removed as the investigation co-ordinator in October 2007, he was replaced by Paulo Rebelo. On    he stated that there was evidence that the McCanns and their friends had not been checking on their children regularly each night as claimed, but that their eight children were all being cared for in one of their friends’ apartments each night. Support for this claim was found when it became clear that every night from Sunday  to Thursday, one or other adult had not been at the Tapas restaurant for dinner each night (see below), either because one of the adults or one of the children was said to be ill.
[*]Photographs taken of Madeleine’s pyjamas – before 3 May - in Praia da Luz, and the mystery of the ‘brown tea stain’
We refer here to a masterly study of issues concerning Madeleine’s pyjamas by Dr Martin Roberts. In his analysis, Dr Roberts publishes disturbing evidence that Madeleine’s pyjamas may have been photographed on a blue hessian background, similar to that of the settee in the McCanns’ apartment, earlier during the day (3w May) when the alarm about Madeleine was raised. He notes, as Kate McCann herself admits, that she washed Madeleine’s pyjamas on the morning of 3 May. He queries, as many others have done, why anyone would need to wash a minor ‘tea stain’ off a pair of pyjamas just two days before the McCanns were due to return home. Most people going on a week’s holiday don’t plan on washing clothes. Dr Roberts’ article carefully analyses a series of photos of Madeleine’s pyjamas published after she was reported missing in which he demonstrates that these photos of Madeleine’s pyjamas were taken inside the McCanns’ own apartment and while the pyjamas were drying. Rightly, Dr Roberts queries what was the point of the McCanns taking these photographs. We agree with his explanation, which can be viewed here:
‘Washed Up’ article:     http://www.mccannfiles.com/id400.html
‘A Nightwear Job’: http://onlyinamericablogging.blogspot.com/2016/03/a-nightwear-job-by-dr-martin-roberts.html

5.    Specific indications that Madeleine was killed on Sunday 29 April

We have set out why we believe that Madeleine was killed, and why she could not have been killed after 6pm on Thursday 3 May as claimed by Portuguese detectives. We have given, above, some general considerations as to when Madeleine may have been killed. It is time for us now to be still more specific about why we think she was killed on the Sunday that week. Here are our main reasons:

1. The change of routines from Sunday night onwards and the absence of independent and corroborated ‘sightings’ of Madeleine from then onwards (see above) 
2. The probable forgery of the ‘Last Photo’

The ‘Last Photo’ shows Gerry McCann, Madeleine and her sister Amelie by the Ocean Club swimming pool. The McCanns say the photo was taken at 2.29pm on Thursday 3 May. However, we are persuaded, largely by evidence on the two ‘Last Photo’ threads on CMOMM, that the Last Photo was taken at lunchtime on Sunday 29 April. A raft of evidence, but especially comparative weather records for the week, point in that direction. There is no other photo of Madeleine which with certainty can be said to have been taken after then, which we regard as hugely significant.                

1. The absence of confirmed photos of Madeleine on the holiday from the ‘Last Photo’ onwards 

This points us in the direction of Madeleine having to serious harm shortly after that photo was taken.    
[*]The involvement of Robert Murat    
In our view the involvement of Robert Murat in this case is another significant pointer to Madeleine having been killed on the Sunday. Here are the relevant considerations we have in mind regarding Murat’s involvement

[*]There is evidence that he and Gerry McCann may have known each other before the McCanns’ holiday in Praia da Luz in 2007
[*]Robert Murat was a well-known long-term resident of Praia da Luz, his mother having lived there for much of her life
[*]He was living in England (Devon) when the McCanns went on holiday to Praia da Luz in 2007
[*]On Monday 30 April, he was hastily summoned  to Portugal, allegedly by his girlfriend, but possibly by others - Murat’s account of the ‘phone call or calls that led him to take a hasty flight to Portugal is not convincing
[*]He took the early morning flight to Faro, Portugal from Exeter at 7am the very next day, Tuesday 1 May
[*]When he was asked at an interview under caution in Portugal on 15 May 2007 what he had been doing in Portugal during his first four days there (1-4 May), he lied about his actions in at least 17 material respects. Later, when re-interviewed by the Portuguese police on 10 and 11 July, after police had interrogated his mobile ’phone, he completely changed his story, claiming he had been ‘too tired’ on 15 May to tell the truth. What possible good excuse could there be for lying so many times about the fate of a missing child? 
[*]There is evidence that the British Embassy in Portugal arranged for Murat to become the main translator for the Portuguese police in the days following Madeleine being reported missing. Quite why the British Embassy would promote Murat to do this job is uncertain, unless he had a significant prior connection with the Embassy
[*]His conduct whilst a translator in those early days after Madeleine was reported missing was bizarre and suspicious. He was observed trying to sneak a look at confidential documents. He kept pestering the police with plausible suggestions about lines of enquiry that they should be following. His conduct during his translations was so outrageous that an inspector sent an urgent report to Dr Amaral, following which Murat was swiftly removed as a translator.
          These and a number of other considerations about Robert Murat lead us to think that he was summoned to Portugal during Monday 30 April because something serious had happened to Madeleine the previous day, and that his help was needed to cover this up
[*]The ‘Make-Up Photo
A very strange photo of Madeleine was published two years after Madeleine was reported missing. It appeared in a short film made by Madeleine’s godfather, film-maker Jon Corner. It showed Madeleine in make-up. She had had blue eye shadow put on her. She had a gold-coloured necklace put around her neck. She had a hair bead on her. The McCanns claimed she had been ‘playing with Mummy’s make-up box’, but that story didn’t stand up to scrutiny. There was evidence that the photo was not taken in England as claimed, but in Portugal. A comparison was made between the Last Photo and the Make-Up Photo. On both, Madeleine was wearing a hair bead. On both, her hair length was the same. In the Last Photo, which appears to have been taken on Sunday, she was happy and obviously smiling at something that amused her. But in the Make-Up Photo, she was looking sad, even miserable. We think there are good grounds for suspecting that the two photos may have been taken on the same day, and that Madeleine’s sad, miserable appearance could be connected in some way to her having been killed later that same day.  

6.   Evidence  that an abduction hoax was planned over a period of four days                 

It follows from all that we have said above that, if Madeleine was indeed killed on Sunday 29 April, those who knew she had been killed must have carefully planned an audacious hoax, so cunning and clever that most people still believe that she was abducted. Here, quite apart from the matters dealt with above, are several other specific indications that an abduction hoax was indeed planned over a four-day period:

[*] The presence of the Director (and his deputy) of a Bell Pottinger subsidiary company - the PR company, Resonate - in Praia da Luz during the days before the alarm was raised
The relevant facts are these. Immediately following the reported disappearance of Madeleine, the holiday company who arranged the holiday, Mark Warner, brought their PR company, Bell Pottinger, to Praia da Luz. Its Head of Risk, Alex Woolfall flew there the very next day (4 May) and was later joined by another top Director of the company. But it later emerged that the Director and his deputy from a Bell Pottinger subsidiary company, Resonate, had flown to help Mark Warner just days before, possibly on Monday 30 April. No satisfactory explanation for this has ever been provided. Were they sent ahead of Bell Pottinger as a kind of advance party because something serious had already happened to Madeleine?  (The McCanns paid the amazing sum of £500,000 to keep Madeleine’s name on the front pages of Britain’s newspapers. That money appears to have come from donations made by the general public.              
[*]The conduct of Nuno Lourenco
On Friday 4 May, the McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner gave a description of a man she said she had seen carrying as child at 9.15pm on the night Madeleine was reported missing. She described a man of medium height, with long black hair, wearing cloth clothes and classic shoes, who ‘didn’t look like a tourist’. The very next day, early in the morning, a man called Nuno Lourenco rang the Portuguese police and said that, six days previoulsy, a man had tried to kidnap his child at a tiny village called Sagres. He described the man as ‘of medium height, with long black hair, wearing cloth clothes and classic shoes, who ‘didn’t look like a tourist’.’ The Portuguese police became convinced that this must be the man whom Jane Tannner’s evidence suggested  had abducted Madeleine. Lourenco supplied the police with a photograph he said he had taken of the man’s car. From this, the police were able to trace the man who was driving the car. It was Wojchiech Krokowski, a man from Poland on holiday with his wife for the week. When examined in detail, Lourenco’s claim that his daughter was nearly kidnapped by Krokowski falls apart. Quite apart from anything else, why did he delay for six days reporting a man taking photos of children on a beach and who later that day tried to kidnap his daughter? Lourenco had evidently planned to call the police and already knew of the description that Jane Tanner had given to the police. This suggests that Lourenco was part of a group of people who planned to deliberately sabotage the Portuguese police’s investigation and send them off in entirely the wrong direction. He had carefully ’fitted up’ Krokowski. 
[*]Hairs of the same haplotype as Robert Murat and Jane Tanner found in Krokowski’s apartment
Further to the above point, hairs of the same haplotype as Robert Murat and Jane Tanner were found at Krokowski’s apartment when it was searched by the police. Whilst this doesn’t prove that Jane Tanner and Robert Murat were in Krokowski’s apartment that week, it certainly raises at least the possibility that they were. Was there a meeting of some kind there that week? Is that when Jane Tanner was briefed to give a description of Krokowski when she was questioned by the Portuguese police?             
[*]The strange booking on Sunday night of the Tapas restaurant  for the evening meal of Tapas 7 all week
This booking appears to have been made on the Sunday night. There are two different versions of who made the booking, which in itself is strange. The reason given by the McCanns an d their friends for making this booking is even stranger; they claimed that they were leaving their children on their own and checking on them but wanted to be able to see their apartment from the restaurant.  This was meaningless. The children were sleeping at the back of their apartment, so there was nothing for them to see from the Tapas restaurant. All kinds of dangers could have befallen the children while the parents were absent  It is our view that the booking of the Tapas restaurant may well have been connected in some way with Madeleine already being dead or having suffered a fatal injury. This seems to be where the story of the McCanns checking the children every half-hour seems to have originated. The claim that the McCanns and their friends were checking their children regularly that week has not been corroborated; indeed the evidence points to their children all being cared for by one of the group each night.
[*]The damage done to the shutters by Gerry McCann on the Sunday or Monday morning
Repairs to the shutters of the McCanns’ apartment were needed on the Monday; Ocean Club staff came to mend them that day. We find this a curious incident. Is it possible that the McCanns and advisers were already planning to claim that the shutters had been jemmied open and smashed by the abductor? (as indeed they did claim, on Thursday).  If so, they would need to demonstrate that the shutters were previously in good working order.     
[*]Evidence that a group planned in advance how to create a major news story on the morning of Friday 4 May
It is a fact that from about 8am on Friday 4 May, the news of Madeleine’s reported disappearance rapidly became the top story in both Portugal and Britain for weeks – and has continued to make international headlines ever since. Was this an accident? We do not think it was. On the very night when the McCanns and their friends should have been distraught , following Madeleine’s sudden disappearance, some of them were busy contacting the TV and print media and claiming, even in the very first hours after they had raised the alarm, that the Portuguese police were incompetent and not organising a proper search for her. The McCanns seemed to know influential people in the TV media and were successful in getting news about Madeleine’s disappearance on to the early Friday morning bulletins. It was very early on, but that on that very Friday, many of the media immediately despatched reporters to Praia da Luz – even though, of course, Madeleine could well have been found alive, safe and well later that very day. What was it that galvanised them all into sending reporters there so soon? One example illustrates our point. An ex-pat living in Spain. Jon Clarke had created a successful newspaper for ex-pats, the Olive Press. He was contacted by one of Britain’s mainstream press in the early hours of the morning, before the media storm broke at about 8am on the Friday morning. Although it was a five-hour journey from his cottage in the countryside around Ronda, he managed to reach Praia da Luz before mid-day, boasting that he was ‘one of the first journalists on the spot. How did his editor in Britain know so early that this was going to be a major international story? 

7.   The main objections to our theory

[*]Nobody could keep up the pretence that their daughter had been abducted - knowing that she was dead - for so long
ANSWER: It has happened many times before in many other similar cases.
[*] Too many people would know that Madeleine had died on Sunday and by now, someone would have broken ranks and revealed the truth
ANWSER: Again there are many instances in history where large groups of people who know about a serious crime work together to keep the crime a secret. To give but one recent example, dozens of people including police and celebrities knew that Jimmy Savile was a paedophile. But they kept silent. No-ne knew until this year that Clement Freud – who twice invited the McCanns to his Praia da Luz home for eats and drinks in the weeks that followed Madeleine’s disappearance - had been a serial paedophile for decades.     
[*] There are too many sightings of Madeleine all week; they can’t all be mistaken
ANSWER: Look at the analysis of these sightings by HideHo that we referred to above.
[*] Mrs Fenn heard Madeleine crying between 10.30pm and 11.45pm on Tuesday night
We reject her evidence for several reasons. She did not make her statement until 20 August - over three-and-a-half months after the event. No-one else heard a child crying loudly for 75 minutes that night. She said she spoke to a friend of hers while the crying was going on, but neither of them did anything about it. Her statement was trailed in advance in the British press in articles which showed every sign of being planted by the McCann Team’s PR agent, Clarence Mitchell. She claimed in her statement that the crying she heard was that of a child ‘more than two’ - but no-one can distinguish between the cry of a two-year-old (the McCanns’ twins) and three-year-old (Madeleine). In short, there is evidence that her statement was fabricated          

Madeleine McCann Research Group, August 2016

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

For discussion, please visit this thread: https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t14249-what-really-happened-to-madeleine-mccann-was-she-killed-on-sunday-29-april

MMRG: LETTER TO PORTUGUESE ATTORNEY-GENERAL: The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: New evidence of what happened to her

A LETTER TO DRª JOANA MARQUES VIDAL, CHIEF PROSECUTOR, PORTUGAL, 28 FEBRUARY 2018, FROM MMRG

Introduction by forum owner, Jill Havern.

On 28 February 2018, members of the Madeleine McCann Research Group posted, by Special Delivery, a letter to the Chief Prosecutor of Portugal, Drª Joana Marques Vidal.

I’m now publishing the letter, in both its English and Portuguese versions. We are grateful to Portuguese journalist Paulo Reis for the translation of this 8,500-word letter, and to one of our long-time supporters who paid the translation fee. I would just like to add that Paulo offered to do the translation for free, but was persuaded by our generous friend to accept a fee at standard translation rates.

The letter was written by members of the Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG).

The lines of enquiry advanced by MMRG in the letter have emerged in large part from the long-term efforts of members of CMOMM. There are a number of Madeleine McCann discussion forums. Ours has been a discussion-forum plus. By that, I mean it is discussion + focussed research. Literally hundreds of CMOMM members have, over the years, contributed to the hypothesis laid out by MMRG in its letter. I thank every one of you so much for your time, effort and input.


As is well known, the Admin & Moderation team here are also of the opinion that many lines of evidence point to Madeleine having died three or four days before the McCanns raised the alarm on Thursday 3 May.

The Portuguese Police are responsible for any further investigation into Madeleine’s reported disappearance and that is why MMRG have sent the letter to the Chief Portuguese Prosecutor, Drª Joana Marques Vidal. It is the view of the overwhelming majority of CMOMM members that the Scotland Yard investigation is a charade and a cover-up of what actually happened to Madeleine, just as Gonçalo Amaral alleged. While MMRG do not think Scotland Yard will act on the letter, MMRG will shortly send it to them, if only to prove - hopefully one day soon – that the Metropolitan Police has acted thoroughly dishonestly in pretending to conduct a genuine investigation.

In signing off, I must on behalf of myself and CMOMM say a huge ‘thank you’ to others who have helped us here and MMRG to get where we are today. I must make mention of those who have kept great libraries of information for us to use, such as pamalam, Nigel Moore’s mccannfiles, and Maddie Case Files.

I want to pay tribute to Gonçalo Amaral and his original team of detectives, who did so much – against an impossible background of intolerable international media pressure, gross interference in his investigation by the British security services, and lies and outright fabrications by many of their witnesses. Portugal can be justly proud of them.

Finally, I must - regrettably - end with a note of disgust. Just before MMRG sent their letter, I heard that the McCanns had not yet paid one penny of the court costs that were awarded against them by the Portuguese Supreme Court in January 2017. For nine years, the McCanns crusaded against Gonçalo Amaral in the courts, pushing him to one hearing after another, using money provided by the British public, supposed to be for finding Madeleine, and no doubt money from certain ‘other’ sources. Kate McCann said she wanted him to ‘feel pain’. Well, they succeeded in doing that all right.

But after nine years fighting him, they LOST. And, fourteen months later, they have not yet had the decency to pay him what the court ordered.

Utterly shameful.

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



From: The Madeleine McCann Research Group
(Address redacted)           Tel:    + 44 7xxxxxxxxx                                                               
                                                                                                         

28 February 2018       To: 

Exma Sra. Procuradora-Geral da República,
Drª Joana Marques Vidal
Rua da Escola Politécnica, 140
1269-269 LISBOA
PT   P O R T U G A L


Dear Drª Joana Marques Vidal


re: The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: New evidence of what happened to her We are a group of mainly British researchers. Most of us have studied the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in depth for the past 10 years. Our members and researchers include many people with professional expertise, such as ex-police officers, lawyers, photographers, computer experts and statement analysts. On 10 September 2007, Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida, on behalf of the Policia Judiciara, produced an interim (‘intercalary’) report summarising the police’s case against Madeleine’s parents, Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann (6): A   The conclusions in Tavares de Almeida’s report

This is an English translation of the conclusions reached by the PJ’s investigation up to and including 10 September 2007: QUOTE From everything that we have discovered, our files result in the following conclusions: A  the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007 B  a simulation - a staged hoax - of an abduction took place C  in order to render the child’s death impossible before 10.00pm, a situation of checking of the McCann couple’s children while they slept was concocted D  Dr Gerald McCann and Dr Kate McCann are involved in the concealment of the corpse of their daughter, Madeleine McCann E  at this moment, there seems to be no strong indications that the child’s death was other than the result of a tragic accident, yet; F   from what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, did not want to deliver up Madeleine’s corpse immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility therefore that it was moved from the initial place where she died. This situation may raise questions concerning the circumstances in which the death of the child took place. G  Therefore, we suggest that the case files are sent to the Republic’s Prosecutor, in the Lagos legal district, for: 1   possible new questioning of the arguidos Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann, and 2   an evaluation of the measure of restraint to be applied in this case. During the house search at the McCann couple’s residence, a diary style manuscript was found, already photocopied, possibly authored by Dr Kate McCann; admitting that it may contain information that may help to reach the material truth of facts. We therefore propose that the photocopies of the said document are presented to the illustrious judge for the purpose of its apprehension (if legal), its translation and eventual collection of information to be included in the files, as necessary for the investigation. At this date, I submit the case files for your appreciation, for you to determine whatever you may see as convenient. 10 September 2007                              Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida UNQUOTE The research that we have undertaken – and that of many others both here, in Portugal, and elsewhere – leads us to support all of the above conclusions in Tavares de Almeida’s report – except for one.   We noted that when the report of the Policia Judiciara was archived in July 2007, it was said that the case would be re-opened if ‘new and credible evidence’ was received by the Portuguese authorities.  The case was re-opened in the PJ’s Oporto office in 2013. Our letter contains evidence which we believe they should see and act on.  As a result of painstaking research by many people, we believe that we are now in a position to supply you with new and credible evidence on one matter (the date of death) covered in the first point of Tavares de Almeida’s report, namely: “Conclusion  A. the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007”. We are satisfied that we can now provide sufficient evidence to show that the minor Madeleine McCann died not on the night of Thursday 3^rd May, but instead died between Sunday afternoon (29^th April) and Monday afternoon (30^th April). The remainder of this letter sets out in brief summary the evidence which we suggest points clearly to Madeleine having died on the Sunday or Monday that week. We will present the evidence under these seven headings:   A  A large number of false statements were made at the outset, containing a huge amount of fabricated evidence. These added credibility to the McCanns’ claim that Madeleine had been abducted on Thursday 3 May. They diverted the PJ investigation into believing that Madeleine was still alive that day. 
B  The photograph of Madeleine McCann, Dr Gerry McCann and Amelie, taken by the Ocean Club pool.  
C  The absence of photographs of Madeleine taken after Sunday. (7)   D  The fabricated statement of Nuno Lourenco, who tried to identify Wojchiech Krokowski as a potential child-kidnapper who had tried to abduct his daughter on Sagres beach. (3) (8) (9) (10) (11)    E  The unreliable evidence of the children’s nanny (and McCann family friend), Catriona Baker, Dr Gerry McCann and Dr Kate McCann about an alleged ‘high tea’ at the Ocean Club Tapas restaurant, at about 5pm to 6pm on Thursday 3 May. (12)   F The lack of any credible, independent evidence by anybody that Madeleine McCann was seen alive after Sunday 29^th April.  (7) (13)   G  The mystery of the strange ‘Make-Up Photo’ of Madeleine, which appears to have been taken on Sunday 29^th April, (5) (14) (15) and  
H  Clear photographic evidence that the very same pyjamas Madeleine had with her on holiday in Praia da Luz were later held up by the McCanns at two press conferences, one in London on 5^th June 2007, the other in Amsterdam, Holland, on 7^th June 2007. (16) (17)
 

In presenting our evidence, we wish to emphasise that we are in no way critical of the PJ investigation. On the contrary, we believe it was diligently and brilliantly pursued in almost impossible circumstances, namely the determination of the British government and media to insist that Madeleine had been abducted. It is our case that the abduction hoax was skillfully crafted over a period of four days, and was so designed as to deliberately mislead the PJ. Only after years of patiently unravelling the evidence and exposing the deceit has it been possible to arrive at our conclusion that Madeleine was probably dead 3 to 4 days before Thursday 3 May.   Before detailing our evidence on these points, we would like to make the following observations on the conclusions of Tavares de Almeida and of Dr Gonçalo Amaral in his book, A Verdada da Mentira, ‘The Truth of the Lie’. (18)   B.   The PJ’s evidence about the alleged ‘high tea’ with Madeleine and her parents on the afternoon of Thursday 3 May

In Tavares de Almeida’s report (6), he states the following about the events of the evening of Thursday 3 May: QUOTE “But there is another question about the timing which is this: The last time that the child was seen outside of the group, by someone who can prove they saw her, was at around 5.35pm, when the parents went to pick her up at the crèche.

“This may widen the time lapse between Madeleine’s ‘disappearance’ and the alarm being raised into more than four hours”. UNQUOTE  

This is paralleled by two short passages in Gonçalo Amaral’s book ‘The Truth of the Lie’. Here is an English translation (by Anna Silvestro) of the relevant paragraphs (18):  QUOTE (1^st passage) “On the fateful day of May 3rd, the attendance register at the play centre indicates that Madeleine arrived at 9.10, accompanied by her father. Her mother came to fetch her at 12.25 for lunch and took her back at 2 o'clock. After jogging on the beach and going to fetch the twins, she collected Maddie at 5.30pm. From that moment on, no other person saw the little girl, apart from her parents and their friends. What happened then in the apartment remains a mystery”.

(2^nd passage)   “THE INTERROGATIONS

“We finally decide to question [Kate McCann[ as a witness, but not to pose questions on the events after 5.30pm, the time at which she returned to the apartment with her three children.

A DISAPPEARANCE, A WINDOW AND A BODY “It is now important to present a summary of this case, based on our deductions: reject what is false, throw out what we can't show with sufficient certainty and validate that which can be proven. Point 5. The body, the existence of which has been confirmed by the EVRD and CSI dogs, but also by the results of the preliminary laboratory analyses, cannot be found. The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following: 1  The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;

2  Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.

3 The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident…”  UNQUOTE  We will present evidence that Madeleine was not present at that ‘high tea’, (4) (13) that the ‘high tea’ never happened, and that there is no credible, independent evidence that Madeleine was seen alive after lunchtime on Sunday 29^th April. (4) (13) C.   The two descriptions of an abductor by Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco We will also make observations on another matter. That is the descriptions given of an abductor to the PJ by the McCanns’ friend, Jane Tanner, during Friday, 4^th May, and a second description of a child kidnapper by Nuno Lourenco, early the following day (Saturday 5^th November).     This is what Tavares de Almeida says about the claims of Jane Tanner (6): QUOTE “Later, during the course of the morning of May 4th, the father gives the same brief description [as Jane Tanner did] and refers back to Jane for additional details. The latter [Jane tanner] appears at the offices of the Policia Judiciara in Portimão at 11.30am. This time, the description is very precise:  

 the individual, aged between 35 and 40, was thin and 1.70m tall;

his hair was dark brown, falling over his collar;

he was wearing cream or beige trousers, probably linen,

a sort of anorak - but not very thick –

and black shoes, classic in style.

He was walking hurriedly, with a child in his arms. He was warmly dressed, the reason she thought he was not a tourist. The child appeared to be asleep - she only saw the legs - had bare feet and was dressed in pyjamas, which were obviously cotton, light-coloured, probably white or pale pink, with a pattern - flowers maybe, but she isn't certain. Concerning the man, she states that she would recognise him from the back by his particular way of walking. The importance of this statement will be seen later”.   UNQUOTE

Now we come to a description of a man given by Nuno Lourenco to the PJ on the morning of Saturday 5^th May (8) (9) (10). He said this man tried to kidnap his daughter outside a café in the village of Sagres, on Sunday 30^th April (8). As we now know from the PJ’s investigations during that Saturday, they identified the man as Wojchiech Krokowski, (9) (10) (18) a Polish man who was on holiday in Praia da Luz in the very same week that the McCanns were also staying there. This is what Gonçalo Amaral says in his book about Nuno Lourenco’s claims (18):
  QUOTE
  “From information from Sagres, we learn that an individual has been surprised on Mareta beach taking photos of several children and in particular of a little girl aged 4, blonde with blue eyes, who looks like Madeleine. It was the little girl's father who noticed him. This 40 year-old man, wearing glasses, tells the investigators that the photographer tried to kidnap his daughter in the afternoon of April 26th in Sagres.   “He allegedly then fled in a hired car with a woman in the passenger seat. The stranger did not look like a tourist; brown hair down to his collar, wearing cream-coloured trousers and jacket and shoes of a classic style. This report reminds us of the individual encountered by Jane Tanner in the streets of Vila da Luz on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance.   “Thanks to the father's composure, he managed to take a photograph of the vehicle. It's not very clear and does not allow us to make out the number plate, but we succeed, nonetheless, in finding the car. The car hire firm provides us with the identity of the driver. He is a forty-year-old Polish man, who is traveling with his wife. They arrived in Portugal on April 28th, from Berlin. At Faro airport, they hired a car and were put up in an apartment in Budens, near Praia da Luz. Unfortunately, on May 5th, at 7am, they had already left, taking with them their camera and all the photos from their holiday. We ask the German police, through Interpol, to monitor them as soon as they arrive in Berlin. All the passengers are questioned, but no one has seen a child looking like Madeleine. In Berlin, the couple take the train to return to Poland. Thus, the Polish trail comes to an end. We would like to have seen their photos...but that proved impossible”.  

UNQUOTE
As can be clearly seen, Gonçalo Amaral and his team of PJ detectives clearly believed that the man seen by Nuno Lourenco at Sagres on Sunday 30^th April was the same man that Jane Tanner had seen at around 9.15pm on Thursday 3^rd May (19) (20)near the McCanns’ apartment. All the following descriptions were identical:


age of the man (35-40, or 40)

hair brown or dark brown

hair ‘down to’ or ‘falling over’ his collar

cream-coloured trousers

‘jacket’ or ‘anorak’  

shoes of a classic style 

“didn’t look like a tourist” (because of wearing ‘warm clothes’).  

In this letter we will present evidence that:

1  Nuno Lourenco’s statement was a complete fabrication 

2  Jane Tanner’s statement was also a complete fabrication  

3  The descriptions given were so similar that they provide the strongest possible evidence that they were planned well before Thursday, and 

4  There was collusion between Jane Tanner, Nuno Lourenco and others to fake the existence of an abductor (3) (9) (10).      
 

CONTINUED https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t15959-letter-to-portugal-the-disappearance-of-madeleine-mccann-new-evidence-of-what-happened-to-her#398686

Natasha Donn: Portuguese Attorney General receives “new theory” in disappearance of Madeleine McCann http://gerrymccan-abuseofpower-humanrights.blogspot.com/2018/03/portuguese-attorney-general-receives.html