# Some oddities regarding Version 2

Disclaimer: Every criminal case which is a case of circumstantial evidence, where there is no confession nor the dead or alive victim is found, will have some oddities to be explained. Oddities occur in such cases in principle always as a result of missing information. Every single oddity on one side and single evidence on the other side may, as a single objective, be rejected by any more or less well founded argumentation. To judge on a case of circumstantial evidence is only possible through an overall view of all the evidence and apparent contradictions as well, which has to be done, hopefully in the future, by a professional judge in a court of competent jurisdiction. Thus the following samples of oddities are just markers one has to think about besides the pure evidence. The listed oddities can therefore be regarded only as puzzles to investigators but never as a sole decision maker.

There are a lot of contradictions in the statements of the Tapas-Group. For a short overview one may see also two free PDF's: →What really happened to Madeleine McCann? and also the fine →2008 booklet from Tony Bennet with the same title but different content.

Also some nice oddities are to be found at the what-happened-to-madeleine-mccann-Blog →(1) →(2) →(3). Dr. Martin Roberts has also made some interesting analysis in 2009, →2010, →2011, →2012.

See also Some oddities regarding Version 1.

## Oddities regarding the time of event 3rd/4th May

### Sample 1

taken from →McCannFiles By Dr Martin Roberts 18 January 2014, LAID TO REST

But who actually put the McCann children to bed that Thursday night?

KM (statement to police, 6.9.07): 'They also kissed Madeleine, who was already lying down. She was under the covers, she thinks, because it was a bit cold… She remained lying down on her left side, with the soft toy and a pink blanket, which she thinks was covering her.'

GM (from the documentary, Madeleine Was Here): “So, I actually came in and Madeleine was just at the top of the bed here, where I'd left her lying and the covers were folded down and she had her cuddle cat and blanket, were just by her head.”

KM (6.9.07): 'After Gerry arrived the children went to brush their teeth and she then read them another story, this time all four of them sitting on Madeleine's bed. She thinks that Gerry entered the room, but does not recall him sitting on the bed.… she thinks that Gerry was in the room, and each one of them, the deponent and Gerry, placed a twin in its cot at the same time, between Madeleine's bed and the bed under the window. They also kissed Madeleine, who was already lying down.'

GM (statement to police, 10.5.07): 'At around 19H00, he made his way to the apartment, finding Kate and the children playing on the sofa. About 10 to 15 minutes later, they took the children to the bedroom and they all sat on Madeleine's bed to read a story.'

KM (6.9.07): 'They talked while they drank, until they left for the Tapas restaurant at around 8.30-8.35 p.m. Before leaving they checked on the children, she doesn't know who; however Gerry says it was him. She only knows the children were quiet. She doesn't know if they were in their same positions. She says she is sure that they were asleep, because Gerry told her so and all was quiet.'

The disturbing fact here is: Although usually in such cases the last seconds with the child are “burned” into the brains of the parents, here we may see the fact that the parents contradict each other and even themselves in their statements. Thus it seems to be just constructed reality.

Another sample of the same oddity is given in →TV-interviews, analysed by Dr. M. Roberts:

“There is a wealth of witness testimony regarding events at the Ocean Club, Praia da Luz on 3rd May, 2007, in the light of which it is strange that neither Kate nor Gerry McCann appears able to discuss their last recollection of daughter Madeleine, on that fateful day specifically.

Q (For Spanish broadcaster, Antena 3): “Allow me to take you both back to the 3rd May. What's the last thing you remember about Madeleine?”

KM: “Just a happy little girl. A beautiful, happy little girl”

Not: 'She was sleeping beautifully' or 'was sound asleep'.

GM: “Just think of all the times… the nice times that we've had with her in our house, and in her playing, in the playroom with her… with her… the twins.”

Note that the question sought to elicit the last thing remembered, not a lasting remembrance. GM could not even place Madeleine in Portugal. He describes happy times at home in Leicester. The interviewer tries again later.

Q: ”…Some questions concerning that night, the 3rd May. What's the last thing you remember of Madeleine that day?“

KM: “It's a little bit like as I mentioned before, she was very happy, errm… and very loving and, you know, I know Madeleine was very happy with her life. She's special.”

Still no specific recollection regarding May 3rd however.

Q: “Kate, you were the last to see her weren't you, because Gerry was playing tennis I believe, isn't that right?”

KM: (Struggles to answer. Fails to answer).

GM: “I saw her. I saw her and, errm… I thought how beautiful she was and how lucky I was to be the father of three children.”

Note that this was in answer to the immediately preceding question of who was the last to see Madeleine, the date reference having now been dropped. To accompany this non-specificity of date, there is elsewhere an adjustment of time. KM is understood to have raised the alarm, upon discovering Madeleine's absence, around 10.00 p.m. GM et al are reported to have been at the Tapas restaurant at that time.

The BBC's Jane Hill asks: “And then on the Thursday night, Kate, when you realised that she wasn't in her bed where you'd left her, did you think, even momentarily perhaps that she'd just woken up, wandered off of her own accord perhaps?”

KM: “Not at all, no.” (long pause)

GM: “No, I mean, that, I think, was absolutely certain but, you know, before you raised the alarm, we double and treble checked, but we certainly had no doubt in our mind that she'd been taken.”

So, GM appears to have been aware of Madeleine's absence earlier than 10.00 p.m. on May 3rd.”

Again the disturbant fact here is, that the McCann's obviously have no (tellable) recognition of the very last seeing of her daughterMadeleine alive. Something like this seemingly will never occure for any usual parents loosing a loved child by an abduction or alike happenings.

This must be seen in a total contrast to what Kate herself stated in her book “Madeleine”, here regarding some not so important happenings with →Maddie at the beach:

“You may be wondering not only what relevance all these minute details might have to anything, but also how I can recall them so distinctly and how accurate my recollections can possibly be. The answer is that, within a couple of days, every single apparently inconsequential thing that happened on that holiday would become vitally important, and Gerry and I would soon be painstakingly trying to extract from our brains every tiny incident, no matter how small, that might have been significant. Armed with notebook, pen and dated photographs, I would be challenging myself to piece together as comprehensive an outline of the sequence of events as I could. The regular routines of the week helped to make any deviations from them stand out and undoubtedly made this easier.”

### Sample 2

The timeline of the Tapas group

The Tapas group consisting of the McCann's and seven adult friends wrote two timelines in the time about 22:15 to 23:15, between the time the alarm was alleged risen by Kate McCann and the arrival of the PJ at apartment 5A. The two timelines were produced in this one hour and are themselves contradicting.

The disturbing facts are:

1. Why invested the Tapas Group this crucial hour for writing timelines, in which they agreed on a special time (22:00) for the alarm, instead on searching for the allegedly some minutes ago disappeared child?
2. Why is the alleged alarm time clearly different from independent witnesses testimony?
3. Why do the two timelines written differ so much that they by no fair means the difference can be explained by some misunderstanding?
4. There is no serious explanation avaiable why in the first timeline there were a lot of control visits to the apartments and no Suspect Viewing, and in the second timeline, written only minutes after the first, there are no control visits but then a suspect viewing.
5. Why did Gerry McCann one week later even push the alarm time another quarter hour into the future?
6. Why were the E-fits of the Smiths-Sighting covered for five years, as this sighting occured exact at the allged time of 22:00 which cannot substantiated by independent witnesses?

The two written timelines were presented to the PJ at 23:15 seemingly by mistake by Russel O'Brien: ”Estimated time 11.15 pm - The first officer to arrive at Ocean Club was handed two lists by Russell O'Brien, written by him on the ripped-off cover of a child's “sticker activity book”.” It is obviously that the timeline, including the events and especially the alleged alarm-time is just a construction of alleged reality, vulgo a lie, as it is not explainable by fair means how the discrepancies could have happend by pure chance.

Evident is also: Between the alleged alarm/abduction time about 22:00 and the appearence of the Police at 23:15 there was maximum just 1:15 time to do so, if believing in Gerry's Statement on 10th May even just one hour, and to construct this twoformally written time lines. Now, to bring together nine people, then talking about consent in time line, thus resulting in the first timeline which was obviously impossible in connection with an abduction theory; then recognizing this; next changing the whole timeline and getting consense on another very strange other timeline, writting it down and making it perfect for PJ (signed “Gerald” exemplar), how long does this take? At least seemingly most of the time of about just one hour. But more than disturbing, besides the unexplainable differences in the two alleged timelines, now is: why didn't they use this critical one hour after there “disappearence” to search for her? Why not giving evidence like every wittness some hours later, at a time when it searching would not be vrucial, and also it then first would be possible to assume that she did not just walk out but eventually could have been abducted? Even when as alleged the “feeling” that she was abducted was really evident to the Tapas Group, why even then now not searching in this crucial first hour intensivly after her and possible get her out of the red-handed abductor and thus possibly saving her live?

At exactly this hour, possibly somewhere in the ultimate neighbourhood, Maddie was possibly in very severe danger. The only thing which could have made some sense then was losing not a jota of time and doing an intensive search around there by all of the Tapas group. Why but now did the Tapas group for sure spend, at least the most part, of this crucial irretrievable hour with adjusting their stupidly contradicting timelines instead of trying to save Madeleine's life being allegedly in ultimate danger?

### Sample 3

First words

When rising the alarm on 3rd May Kate came screaming back to the group crying, 'They’ve taken her, they’ve taken her'. Kate's first words to her mother (by phone the same evening), Susan Healy, after Madeleine's disappearance were: “She's gone, mum. She's gone.”. Disturbing fact here is: Although allegedly nothing was clear about what happened to Madeleine at the evening/night 3rd May 2007, Kate at once said it was an abduction and possibly that she deceased. Obviously things only the offender could know at this time.

See witness Charlotte Pennington. See some more also on →First reactions at McCannFiles.

### Sample 4

The story of the →'Jemmied shutters'

Extract: “The First Reactions: Here we read the first reactions from Kate and Gerry's closest family and friends, immediately after they have been contacted individually with the news that Madeleine has been 'abducted'. Note how consistent the stories are that an 'abductor' gained access to a locked apartment by breaking open the shutter on the bedroom window and escaping by the front door. The story changed later when it became clear the shutters on the window had not been forced, were not damaged in any way and could only be opened from inside the apartment. From that point, the McCanns became convinced that an 'abductor' had entered through 'open' patio doors and escaped through the open shuttered window. ”

### Sample 5

Number One Suspect

On the evening 3rd May there was only one immediate independent suspect sighting of an possible abductor. See Smith's sighting about 22:00 clock 400 yards footwalk from the Apartment 5A. The suspect was described and an E-Fit was produced but oppressed by the Madeleine Fund for five years until Operation Grange went on with it at Crimewatch in 2013. Mr. Smith identified the suspect with high possibility as Gerry McCann.

### Sample 6

Vandalising Evidence

Although all of the Tapas 9 were equiped with Digital Cameras and Mobile Phones, →Data on the phones for the 3rd/4th were deleted, and allegedly not any photo taken. The photos would have given evidence to what especially Gerry McCann had worn that evening in relation to the Smiths' Sighting (ca. 22:00).

Also the McCann's alleged to have not had a first-aid kit, obviously it vanished. Although it is well known that Doctors allways have well equiped one's; even usual parents with three small kids always have alrge first-aid kits. From this the evidence, if or if not any dangerous medication resulting in an allergic shock got vanished. Seemingly deliberate.

### Sample 7

The nonexisting photos

The evening of the 3rd of May was the last evening for celebration, as the 4th dropped out due to the fact that on 5th very early in the morning the friends had to leave the resort. Everybody was equipped with digital cameras and mobile phones able to take photographs. Usually on such a last evening celebration dozens of photos are taken as commemoration. But all members of the Tapas 9 insisted to have not taken any photo. Why that?

The disturbing fact is: If they didn't lie and they really did not take any photo, there obviously was no reason to celebrate as seemingly they knew Maddie was dead. Or they lied and took photos, but destroyed them to avoid pieces of evidence (e.g. what clothes did Gerry wear regarding to the Smiths' Sighting?). In either case, Maddie was known to be already dead.

### Sample 8

The Quiz happening/Maddie crying on 1st/2nd May

At around 8.45pm on Tuesday 1st May 2007, Miss Nejoua Chekaya, the Ocean Club’s busty Aerobics Instructor, held a “Quiz Night” and was later invited, allegedly by Gerald McCann, to join his table which she did sometime between 9.30pm and 9.50pm. She did not say how long she had remained with them, but she is not the sort of woman men would wish see to leave too quickly. Miss Chekeya stated that one dinner setting was unused and that she could not remember seeing Kate McCann.

Mrs Fenn, the McCann’s neighbour, reported that Madeleine had cried for her father between 22.30 and 23.45. The [→phone records ] evidence shows that Kate McCann was in Apartment 5A 14 minutes before Madeleine started crying. Tuesday 1st May 2007 is the only night (except, of course, for Thursday 3rd May 2007) that either of the McCanns or any of their friends made calls after dinner. Mrs McCann volunteered to the PJ that on the night of Wednesday 2nd May 2007, she had slept in the spare bed in her children’s room because her husband had not paid her enough attention over dinner. Or put another way, does she mean the amorous Scot was paying someone else (like Miss Chekeya [ besides: also rumors alleged to have had an affair with also busty Jane Tanner ]) too much attention, causing her to stomp out of the Tapas Bar before him: ultimately leading to the spare bed in a strop? Gerald McCann said he thought the reason his wife had slept in the children’s bedroom was because of his snoring and that he did not even bother asking her the following morning what the problem was.

Kate McCann’s mobile was next activated six times, in rapid fire, between 22.16 and 22.27, after she had returned to Apartment 5A after dinner. The antenna traffic proves that these calls were not made to any of the “Tapas 9”. (The phone data were later deleted, thus vandalizing eveidence, by the McCann's.) A possible reason is that they wanted to conceal both Kate McCann’s state of mind and the fact that she had returned to Apartment 5A, just before Madeleine’s cried for help. On Wednesday 2nd May 2007 morning, Kate McCann called her friend “Amanda” at 7.36.41 and again at 7.36.45. This was around two hours earlier than any of mobile activations on any other morning: so Kate McCann was “up with the larks”. Amanda returned the calls at 7.50. There is no record of how long any of these calls lasted or whether they were SMSs. They were all deleted from memory. At 8.07 Gerald McCann received a call from the SMS message centre (447818520047), but does not appear to have responded. At 8.50 Kate McCann received a call from a UK mobile xxxxx27010 and returned it at 8.53, before going to play tennis. Gerald McCann received a series of calls from his SMS message centre between 9.10 and 10.47, again without response. The batch of SMS messages received by Gerald McCann on Wednesday 2nd May 2007 seems to have caused him some anxiety. Although the number “07818520047” is in a block allocated to Vodafone, the company has no record of the subscriber’s name. Thus the number appears to be a message box for Gerald McCann that sends him an SMS when his mobile is unable to accept a call.

However, when he was asked by “Expresso TV” on 6th September 2008 about the “sixteen SMS messages” received, he flustered: “No one has ever asked to see any of my text messages. There is no way that there 16 messages on that day or even the day after, you know. You know, the day after, you know that we got…” Kate McCann came to his rescue and interrupted:“Gerry hardly ever sends text messages until the day after, the day after Madeleine was taken”. Gerald McCann continued: “so you know that it is actually rubbish”. Their McCann’s denials were, of course, technically true although perhaps disingenuous – because there were only 14 messages received on the day before they reported Madeleine missing and two on the day after. There were 16 SMS messages, in total, so why prevaricate and deny an allegation that was never made. The question was about received messages, not those sent, and on the day before not on 3rd May 2007 or the day after! In the field of forensic linguistics you must always concentrate on the precise wording of denials and especially on those of allegations not made. The denials made by the McCanns are suspicious. However, Mrs McCann’s statement about her husband not sending SMS messages, until after Madeleine’s disappearance, is confirmed by Vodafone’s records.

Obviously the truth behind this incidence is that the McCann's had a severe marriage crisis. Gerry's preference for busty girls contrasting the flat breasted marathon sportswomen Kate climbed up to ultimate stress on Evening/Night 1st/2nd May. Seemingly Kate informed some friends in her anger, which let wake up Maddie and she then deliberatly leaved her crying back for a run into the circumference of the ocean club. She slept in a spare bed and next morning she stood up much earlier as usual and again called friends or relatives still being in anger. Gerry then got a bunch of 14 SMS's in return making him also ultimate marriage, if not divorce, stress. It obviously could have been one of the main reasons which led to the then coming accident resulting in the death of Madeleine after 17:30/around 18:00 on the 3rd May 2007.

(see also →Mail on Sunday, McCanns rowed and slept in separate rooms the night before Madeleine vanished)

### Sample 9

David Payne calls Scotland Yard on 23:30 4th May.

On his last interview, David Payne was asked about his dubious call to London Police on 23:30 4th May 2007:

(Officer:) “Yeah. So my, my recollection of xxx is a London number if that helps.” (David:) “Yeah, I'll just have a little look. I, I can't remember, I've got friends that are down in London which I haven't got her number in here, whether she saw it and rang it I don't know. Was it a long, long call or…”

(Officer:) “Err, yeah it was quite a long call.” (David:) “Right, okay.”

(Officer:) “But you actually called the number.” (David:) “Yeah, okay.'

(Officer:) “Do you recall me telling you about the London number, which you couldn't find in your phone” (David:) “Yes.”

(Officer:) “That number actually transcribes back to the Crime Specialist Director in London.” (David:) “Mm.”

(Officer:) “Did you contact them?” (David:) “Err I did yes. My, err you know my sister err had been in contact with them and she was trying to do everything that she could knowing the, err, the difficulties that we were having out there so you know I did approach them just asking for advice but err I can't remember, I don't think I actually spoke to anyone there, but for some reason that wasn't carried forward.”

(Officer:) “Yeah.” (David:) “But I mean, you know, just into the context of the conversation you know we're in a strange country, we've got no representeers we don't know what's going on, all hell's broken loose and you know to see whether you can do anything to help Madeleine come back, you know and that was the lines that we were taking.”

(Officer:) “Do you remember who you spoke to?” (David:) “I don't know.”

(Officer:) “The call was made on the following day at twenty three thirteen, so that's late at night.” (David:) “Mm.”

(Officer:) “You don't recollect anything else about the conversation that you had with that, was it you that made the call” (David:) “Err I, yeah I know that I got phone numbers from my sister which I did you know ring them but I can't remember making one late at night.”

The disturbing fact is: Of course the Tapas 9 had as much as British official support as possible. Very unusual the British Consul came on his own feet to Praia da Luz to serve the Friends already in the morning, and later even the British Ambassador from Lissabon made an official SkyTV Show sustaining the Group. There was no reason to make a long, obiously private (23:30) call to a seemingly friendly high level Police Officer in Britain. This but may be seen in relation to his obvious part in covering the death and also the The Payne-Allegation and the possible background.

### Sample 10

The last Photo

The parents had a good 6 Mpx Canon Camera which makes pretty pictures at high resolution. But they asserted to have no recent photos shortly before the ”abduction“. The alleged last Photo of 3rd of May, released on 24th May but is just an altered picture and is clearly a fake. This is very much disturbing. The main question arising are:

- why didn't the parents have any original usable photos of Maddie on 3rd May?
- if they really didn't have one, why was Gerry so eager but to fake one?
- why the hell did Gerry cover his eyes on the photo with faked large sunglasses?

The answer maybe, that they needed a Photo of the last day of Maddie to “prove” that the whole family was in best order and well tempered. But as sample 8 shows, this was definitly not the case. Indeed there was large stress between the parents, such that well tempered photos could not been taken. Another additional possibility lying on hand is (in connection with Pamela Isobel Fenn witnessing crying Maddie and the Quiz happening and its aftermath) that e.g. Kate hurt Maddie on 2nd/3rd May which then would have left visible bruises on such a photo. Which then but would have given hard evidence for the Accidential Killing Theory. A reason to eventually “photoshop” Maddie into the picture. But the undeniable fact that Gerry's sunglasses are faked in the picture, this may have only one logical reason: Gerry's left eye region was hit, presumably by a slap in the face by Kate on 2nd May. There don't exist Photos of 2nd or another of 3rd May, but the first next one was done on 4th morning by reporters. Obviously he was slaped in the face some time before as the still little swollen left eye side shows. Also in the 3rd May photo with faked sunglasses, one may see the light extended bruise lighted by sunlight. This is how the ”last photo“ originally looked really like. From the original position of the sunglasses it is obvious how the reflection originated and why the tip of Amelie's hat can be seen in it. We can find the high-resolution photo at →Pamalam. There we can see the fake more exactly: Besides the physically impossible false horizon reflection, we get another prove: The red arrows point to the places, where the frame of the sunglasses should appear, but there aren't any. This the case, as the glasses where taken from his T-shirt collar where it was folded. The white reflections on the frame just show the T-shirt. The last question that comes up now may everybody answer oneself: May you really trust people who deliberately falsify such an important photo?

### Sample 11

The Poster Photo

There are some obstacles with the alleged “last photos”. Although any “last photo” was recommended to be used for the search for Maddie's wanted-poster, the parents seemingly had some problems to provide one actually taken. On the commonly known wanted-poster they indeed provided an absolutly out-of-time picture, showing Maddie at the age of about 2. As everyone knows, kids that age change their appearence much in just months. The far from being actual photo thus was clearly hampering the investigations in 2007. We have to question why did they chose such a useless photo? If the answer is, that it shows clearly the small colombola in her eye as an immoveable identity sign of Maddie, then this is not less disturbing: As police warned them not to make public this mark, as it would risk their daughters life, if she was with an abductor. As then the Abductor would have to get rid of her.

### Sample 12

Not searching “physically”

One of the most disturbing misbehaviour of the parents is the fact, which is underlined by a lot of dependent and independent witness statements, that they didn't really search for Madeleine (after their alleged disappearing at 22:00 until 23:15 when GNR police arrived). Even the parents themselves admitted to not having searched “physically”.

See McCanns Interview →The McCanns Did Not Physically Search for Madeleine

See also one of the independent witnesses interview: →Tapas Cook breaks silence

Much Disturbing here is: If a mother returns to a closed apartment, where is no physically evidence for a break in to be seen; where is practically everything in the same order when they last saw it; but except a window in the childrens bedroom which is slightly opened? What would you think, what would you do? It is on hand then that the girl missing may have opened herself a window to go around the Ocean Club on her own? Isn't it? Would you now search at once for the missing child somewhere around the Apartment?

Or would you cry “They have taken her…” and insist that there must be an abductor? And thus you wouldn't “physically” search for your loved child? Really? Or is it a sign that they knew that there was nothing to search for. Besides, see Tapas cook statement, even the relatives of the McCann family didn't help in searching for Madeleine when visiting them in Portugal later.

## Oddities regarding the aftermath of the event

### Sample 1A

→Portuguese priest 'ruined' by McCanns; Catholic News, 12 Dec 2007

The Portugese priest who gave solace to the McCann family after the ‘disappearance’ of their daughter Madeleine has stripped his church of all traces of the girl, with friends saying the experience has left him “ruined”. The Express reports seven months after the tragedy, Fr Jose Manuel Pacheco ordered the removal of scores of green and yellow ribbons which were put up as a symbol of hope in the days after Madeleine vanished. Posters and photographs of Madeleine which plastered the village of Praia da Luz have also been removed. Friends of Fr Pacheco – who came under police scrutiny after he gave the keys to his church to Gerry and Kate McCann to allow them to pray round the clock – say they fear for his health and that his life is now ruined. Fr Pacheco was questioned twice by detectives, and the church and its grounds were searched by police. Investigators became convinced Kate had confessed to him – but Fr Pacheco insisted he would stand by his priestly vow. A close friend of Fr Pacheco said the priest becomes irate at the mention of the Madeleine case and that even close friends must tread carefully when broaching the subject. “He says that it is an extremely unpleasant situation and that the McCann family only ever brought him problems. He told one friend they ruined his life,” the friend said. “He just wants to get on with his peaceful life before the McCann whirlwind raped his world. This has all been a very bad experience for him.” Another friend described Fr Pacheco as a “nervous wreck” and that he was “hiding secrets that are destroying him.” There has been no comment from Fr Pacheco.

See also more information about Priest(s) at →McCannFiles and →McCannFiles.

See also →Youtube Video on pressure done to a possible witness.

In this circumstance also the evidence about “Maddie ghost visits mum”, written on Daily Star (Express Group have removed all online links) on 19 October 2007 is of some disturbing interest: “Tormented Kate McCann told last night how she is visited in the night by the spirit of her missing daughter Madeleine. The anguished GP says she is regularly woken up by visions of the four-year-old in her bedroom. Kate, 39, revealed the visions to her mum, Susan Healy, who was worried about her daughter’s lack of sleep Susan had assumed Kate and husband Gerry were being kept awake by her two-year old twins, Sean and Amelie. She was stunned when Kate revealed it was missing Madeleine who was haunting her. Susan, said: “She told me she has difficulty sleeping and wakes during the night. I asked: 'Do the twins come and wake you up?” Kate said: “No, it's Madeleine. She comes in.”“

In this circumstances also one may have a look at remarks about the McCann's visit to the Pope, taken from Tony Bennet's booklet (2008):

The Pope’s decision to withdraw all support for the Doctors McCann

On his own admission, in a video-recorded interview,Clarence Mitchell , who was then employed as the Head of the Media Monitoring Unit for the Central Office of Information, boasted of having ‘arranged’ for McCanns to visit the Pope. He did this using government connections and by speaking to the Roman Catholic Archbishop of England, Cormac Murphy O’Connor. Just over three weeks after Madeleine ‘disappeared’, the McCanns met with the Pope, Benedict XVI, who publicly blessed a photograph of Madeleine before the world’s media.

The Vatican thereafter carried very prominent pages on their website featuring the McCanns and their emotional search for Madeleine. The McCanns had frequently made their ‘strong Catholic faith’ very much an issue, and were frequently described as ‘devout Catholics’.

Yet 48 hours before the McCanns were made formal suspects, the Pope withdrew all references to Madeleine.

No further references to the McCanns’ campaign and their fund to ‘find Madeleine’ have been made on the Vatican website since then. It seemed to many seasoned observers of the Roman Catholic Church that the Pope had received strong indications that the McCanns’ abduction claim did not stand up.

### Sample 2A

In an interview for CTN →Kate said:

“It really isn't easy,” coping. “Some days are better than others. … There's days when you think, 'I can't do this anymore,' and you just want to press a button, and we're all gone, and it's all finished, and we're all together and gone. Wherever. But you can't, you know. Just occasionally you'll have a – if you're having a really bad day, which we do. And you can't help but think that.”

This is an extremely disturbing quote. What is Kate saying when she says that she sometimes wants to “press a button”, the result of which would be that they were “all gone, and it's all finished”? It would appear to imply the families communal death through the quick and painless means of pressing an imaginary 'suicide' button. If that is what she means, then there must be serious concern for the safety and welfare of the twins should the McCanns eventually face charges over Madeleine's disappearance. She continues by saying that they will be “all together and gone”. The only way they could be “all together” in such a scenario as she describes, is if she knows that Madeleine is already dead.

### Sample 3A

→An Empty Cupboard, 25 Feb. 2014:

Extract: “Go back only three years of the seven and recall how we were told day after day that Kate McCann's quest for truth, Madeleine, was going to kill off the haters' gossip and and set the record straight. That lasted until publication day and a relentless confirmation, page by damning page, of almost all the rumours, including, to take a single forty eight hour episode, her admission about the systematic mobilization of family shills to lie on her behalf – the famous “green light”– and Gerry McCann's dignified and unwavering belief in his own innocence, so strong that on hearing the details of the case against them late on Thursday September 6 [2007] – including that shadowy and as yet unnamed witness who saw them “carrying a big black bag” – he burst into tears and cried “we're finished!” And followed his next-day interrogation by making plans to “sneak” (Kate McCann's word) across the border in a hire car.

Strong truthful Kate talked him out of it and instead “on the advice of our lawyers”(Smethurst, Caplan) the pair “decided to get out as soon as possible,” i.e. with a panicky Saturday September 8 [2007] as their last day in Portugal. “Of course,” writes our heroine, “many sections of the press would suggest we were running away – ”. That's right, Kate, they would, they did and you were. But Kate, in a typical Madeleineism, forgets what she's written a few paragraphs before about legging it SAP and completes the sentence “– but as I've recounted, the decision had been made several weeks earlier” and “all we were doing was leaving a day earlier than originally planned.” Reading that typical exhibition from a nauseating, self-admitted and proven liar reminds us why WAs [circle of supporters/ Wright's Activists] don't quote Madeleine [Kate's Book] much anymore, doesn't it? Instead they put it into a “Don't mention again” locked drawer.”

### Sample 4A

Psychology

When questioned with particular dangerous questions there were allways seen suspicious behaviour which may be attached to typical movements of liars, or at least to people who have to conceal something in the dark. This of course does not mean that such people ARE Liars, it just means to be SUSPICIOUS of being a Liar. Although every witness will feel sometimes uncomfortable on some particular questions, the fact here is that this seemingly appeared to be allways the case for the McCann's in critical interviews. After 2008 but Clarence Mitchell controlls very much interviews and critical queations are since disallowed.

One may have a look at the Youtube Videos →McCanns body talk and →McCanns body talk 2.

Especially interesting is the video →McMinute - Gerry asked "Did you kill your daughter?". It shows the reaction when Gerry is against expectation asked “Did you kill your daughter?”. It must be remarked here, that this question at that time he was asked in several interviews, but never that suddenly and directly. What we see then are seemingly 10 seconds close to a confession (Seconds 7 to 17), as Gerry starts to cry at high frequency speech, but then gets back to control as he needs some time to come down to his usual kind of story telling. In this circumstance of being close to a confession one may also have a look at the video →Why did Gerry's sister expect Kate to be charged with accidental death?. In late 2007 Gerry's Sister Philomena told a reporter that Kate seemingly would confess soon.

### Sample 5A

The 48 Questions

On the 7th Sept. 2007 Gerry McCann and also Kate Healy McCann were asked 48 simple questions. As they were official suspects (arguidos) at this date they of course had the right to refuse to answer. While Gerry decided to answer and did, with some more or less contradictions left, but Kate refused to do so as she was adviced so by here lawyers. The disturbing fact is, that those questions were known and could be answered as well naturally by an innocent , but even also from a self confident liar, easily. Obviously there was to much worry about if Kate could stay the stress and would not keep that cool as Gerry did.

These are the questions she refused to answer :

1. On May 3 2007, around 22:00, when you entered the apartment, what did you see? What did you do? Where did you look? What did you touch?
2. Did you search inside the bedroom wardrobe? (she replied that she wouldn’t answer)
3. (shown 2 photographs of her bedroom wardrobe) Can you describe its contents?
4. Why had the curtain behind the sofa in front of the side window (whose photo was shown to her) been tampered with? Did somebody go behind that sofa?
5. How long did your search of the apartment take after you detected your daughter Madeleine’s disappearance?
6. Why did you say from the start that Madeleine had been abducted?
7. Assuming Madeleine had been abducted, why did you leave the twins home alone to go to the 'Tapas’ and raise the alarm? Because the supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.
8. Why didn’t you ask the twins, at that moment, what had happened to their sister or why didn’t you ask them later on?
9. When you raised the alarm at the ‘Tapas’ what exactly did you say and what were your exact words?
10. What happened after you raised the alarm in the ‘Tapas’?
11. Why did you go and warn your friends instead of shouting from the verandah?
12. Who contacted the authorities?
13. Who took place in the searches?
14. Did anyone outside of the group learn of Madeleine’s disappearance in those following minutes?
15. Did any neighbour offer you help after the disappearance?
16. What does ‘we let her down’ mean?
17. Did Jane tell you that night that she’d seen a man with a child?
18. How were the authorities contacted and which police force was alerted?
19. During the searches, with the police already there, where did you search for Maddie, how and in what way?
20. Why did the twins not wake up during that search or when they were taken upstairs?
21. Who did you phone after the occurrence?
22. Did you call Sky News?
23. Did you know the danger of calling the media, because it could influence the abductor?
24. Did you ask for a priest?
25. By what means did you divulge Madeleine’s features, by photographs or by any other means?
26. Is it true that during the searches you remained seated on Maddie’s bed without moving?
27. What was your behaviour that night?
28. Did you manage to sleep?
29. Before travelling to Portugal did you make any comment about a foreboding or a bad feeling?
30. What was Madeleine’s behaviour like?
31. Did Maddie suffer from any illness or take any medication?
32. What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister?
33. What was Madeleine’s relationship like with her brother and sister, friends and school mates?
34. As for your professional life, in how many and which hospitals have you worked?
35. What is your medical specialty?
36. Have you ever done shift work in any emergency services or other services?
37. Did you work every day?
38. At a certain point you stopped working, why?
39. Are the twins difficult to get to sleep? Are they restless and does that cause you uneasiness?
40. Is it true that sometimes you despaired with your children’s behaviour and that left you feeling very uneasy?
41. Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?
42. In England, did you medicate your children? What type of medication?
43. In the case files you were SHOWN CANINE forensic testing films, where you can see them marking due to detection of the scent of human corpse and blood traces, also human, and only human, as well as all the comments of the technician in charge of them. After watching and after the marking of the scent of corpse in your bedroom beside the wardrobe and behind the sofa, pushed up against the sofa wall, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
44. When the sniffer dog also marked human blood behind the sofa, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
45. When the sniffer dog marked the scent of corpse coming from the vehicle you hired a month after the disappearance, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
46. When human blood was marked in the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
47. When confronted with the results of Maddie’s DNA, whose analysis was carried out in a British laboratory, collected from behind the sofa and the boot of the vehicle, did you say you couldn’t explain any more than you already had?
48. Did you have any responsibility or intervention in your daughter’s disappearance?

The Only QUESTION SHE DID ANSWER

Q. Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

A. ’Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.’

### Sample 6A

The never done questioning of the McCann's by British prosecutors

Altough since today there was not any sustainable evidence to the abduction theory, and despite the fact that the only sustainable evidence still points to the parents of Madeleine, the parents were never questioned by any British Authority. The Leictershire Prosecutor called such a questioning barefaced just a “waist of time”. Even Scotland Yards ”Operation Grange” started with the still unfounded presumption of the McCann's to be not suspect. Alarmingly the Madeleine Fund in the preliminary agreement between the Met and the Portuguise Police got the status of a Co-Investigator with a very privileged access to intimate actual informations regarding the ongoing investigations.

This is more than disturbing, as the evidence until today solely points to the parents, a fact which cannot been overseen by any professional investigator who is aware of the still in effect PJ-files. The presumption of innocence for anybody in a state of law never means that people being suspects may not been taken under even harsh examinations. More than that, even when not convinced fully, it is visa versa the very duty of any state of law at least to question the prime suspects, such as here the McCann's and the Tapas 7, by aggravating cross-examination and even more painful house searches.

Really none of those duties ever were done in the UK. This cannot been explained by pure chance, there seemingly is the oddity of a still enduring covering up of the case in the UK leaded by some still not fully decoded high levels of preferabilties for the State.

Remarkable: On 3 Dec. 2007, the Daily Express published an article (no longer on-line) about the McCanns: “Madeleine: British Diplomat had doubts about McCanns A British diplomat warned the Foreign Office of concerns regarding Madeleine McCann’s parents, it emerged last night. Doubts about Kate and Gerry McCann were raised almost immediately by an official sent to Praia da Luz due to what he considered to be “inconsistencies” in the couple’s testimonies about the night the four-year-old vanished. The warning was contained in a classified document sent from the Algarve to the Foreign Office days after Madeleine’s disappearance. Details of the letter have been leaked through the British diplomatic mission in Brussels to the respected Belgian newspaper Derniere Heure. The unnamed diplomat voices his concern about the “confused declarations” as to the whereabouts of Kate and Gerry McCann and their friends in the final hours before Madeleine’s disappearance. He also mentions the couple’s “lack of co-operation” with the Portuguese police in the light of instructions from London suggesting consular staff “overstretch their authority and put pressure on the Portuguese authorities”. The document also asks for confirmation of orders sent by the Foreign Office in London the day before, commanding embassy staff to give “all possible assistance to the McCann couple”.“

### Sample 7A

Resignation of Kate's friend Esther McVey

McCannFiles: →Esther McVey is a long-time friend of Kate McCann and was spokesperson for Madeleine's Fund from its launch in May 2007. Esther and Kate first met in 1986, when they were both 18, at the North East Technical College in West Derby [in Liverpool], where they were studying A-levels together. She joined the board of Madeleine's Fund on 20 June 2007 and continued her role as spokesperson for the Fund until her resignation, announced in January 2008. Ms McVey has remained resolutely tight-lipped as to the reason, or reasons, behind her resignation - a rather ironic position, considering her former roles in the media/PR. She is currently the Conservative MP for Wirral West and the minister for disabled people. Her own website, on which she once displayed an online petition in support of the McCanns, now contains no mention of Madeleine McCann at all.

### Sample 8A

Reaction on Blood traces and Cadavour Odour in Apartment 5a

With no reasonable doubt there were traces of blood and cadavour odour in the McCann's Apartment. Any parenst of an abducted/killed child would of course if innocent insist that police have to follow this strongest evidence found since then. But what disturbingly happens is: The parents deny there beeing any traces at all. They still today insists the DNA results would not be conclusive and the sniffer dogs would have been wrong anyway.

### Sample 9A

Friends hold out from the Maddie search

Until the 3rd of May, the nine adults of the Tapas-group were best friends. Normally, it would be entirely self-evident that these friends would also fight together after the 3rd May until to today in the search for Maddie at the forefront. But what did really happen? None of the seven former friends of the McCann's took significant enough part in the global search for Madeleine Beth McCann. All drew back and no one helped in an appropriate manner.

How to explain this? It could be that Gerry and Kate had no talent for reliable friends. That all these friends only cowards and shirkers were. All seven. But can that really be?

The same is true for the McCanns Extended Family. There is no adequate involvement in the search for Maddie. Just Uncle Brian Kennedy holds a stake at Madeleine's Fund as one of the directors. That's all, nothing else. Why this denial of cooperation?

The disturbing answer may be quite simple that they all knew that Maddie is dead and the parents bear their guilt. Obviously, with their help in the cover-up of the fact, they had done their largest and most definitely last friendly service to the McCann family.

Note: There is a witness statement by Madeleine's grandmother Susan (Mother of Kate) which underlines the situation (→Flash Magazine, 30 Apr. 2009) : „….Maddie's mother does not leave the house and the father grows ever more distant from his wife. Two years after the child's disappearance, Madeleine's grandmother Susan tells Flash! she “lost both her daughter and granddaughter that wretched night.” …Nowadays the McCanns are not a part of the area's social scene, unlike before. “They are insular.” According to the source the residents are tired of the media, that's why they distance themselves. At most the house is visited by close family and three others “of the group of nine friends (seven friends) who were with them in the Algarve when Maddie disappeared, that is David and Fiona Payne and Jane Tanner, as they are connected with them.”“. Also other former friends drew back, see e.g. Sample 1A and Sample 7A. Even on the webpage of Kate McCann's book 'Madeleine' co-author and former Gordon Brown ghostwriter J. K. Rowling there is no mention left for the search for Maddie. The last gathering of the Tapas-friends where at Rothley in Nov. 2007.

### Sample 10A

The cancelled Reconstruction

A reconstruction, or better said a reenactment of events with the original people at the original site is always a mighty forensic tool for finding the truth. You can use it very well to find out what fits together and what does not fit. So contradictions of statements can be identified, but also new possibilities of a putative crime run may be found. For a possible culprit so provides such a reconstruction hazard. For the possibly innocent, however, a great option is given to find the unknown kidnappers. But in spite of varied efforts of the Portuguese police reconstruction with flimsy grounds was rejected and never adequately supported neither by the Tapas-Group yet by the British authorities.

See summary of details at →McCannFiles: “Emails and letters from the PJ files revealing the reluctance of the 'Tapas Seven' and Jeremy Wilkins to take part in a reconstruction of the events of the evening of May 3rd - eventually leading to its cancellation.”