The truth about Madeleine McCann to remain censored

click to enlarge

So Gonçalo Amaral's book is to remain banned.

According to the stats for the blog 'Maddie: The Truth About The Lie', which has only been going a few months, there have been 230,601 visits from all around the world looking for the truth about Maddie.

70,778 just this month alone so far and it's only the 18th day.

The map shows just today's visitors and it's only lunchtime.

Even people from the NHS have been reading it.

You may have got the book McBanned, Kate and Gerry, but you will never stop people searching for the truth about Maddie. The curiosity about what really happened to your daughter is growing by the day. And as you silence people more will talk, and as you shut websites down, more will be created. The truth is much more important than your lies, just as your tapas meal was more important than the safety of your three babies.

Comment posted by Tony Bennett on the forum:

The dogs are more guilty than Amaral of libelling the McCanns. They should never have been sent to the Algarve in the first place. And we should henceforth ban all videos and records of their so-called 'evidence'. The only comments that should ever be permitted about those dogs are:

1) Martin Grime's admission that so far as evidence in a court of law goes, their so-called 'evidence' is utterly valueless unless it can be corroborated with forensic evidence, and

2) Dr Gerald McCann's statement that the dogs' evidence is 'incredibly unreliable'.

Remember also that Eddie does not have the legal power to sue Dr Gerald McCann for that last-quoted statement.



Joana Morais: Court upholds 'Maddie - The Truth of the Lie' book and documentary ban

The Blacksmith Bureau: On it goes

Textusa: About the Expected

McCann Unravels: Judgement Day

Anna Andress: Gonçalo Amaral's book is still available outside Portugal.

Transfattyacid: Miss Scarlet In The Bedroom With CuddleCat

Little Morsals: Did Kate and Gerry really win?

McCanns: Decision Due on Ex-Cop Book Ban

6:08am UK, Thursday February 18, 2010

Julia Reid, Sky News Online

Kate and Gerry McCann will find out later whether a book that claims they were involved in their daughter's disappearance will be banned for good.

Goncalo Amaral, the former lead investigator in the case of Madeleine McCann, is fighting to overturn a temporary injunction on his book, which alleges Madeleine died in the family's holiday apartment and her parents faked her abduction.

The McCanns travelled to Lisbon earlier this year to hear the final legal arguments in the case and renew their appeal to find Madeleine, who disappeared from the resort of Praia da Luz in May 2007.

They said they were fighting the case to make sure people keep searching for their daughter.

"If people believe, unnecessarily, that she's dead without any evidence then we'll never find her," Mr McCann said.

His wife added: "The important thing to remember is that a child is still missing." (Why can Kate never bring herself to say 'our' child is still missing?)

The couple also said they wanted the whole investigation into their daughter's disappearance to be reviewed by Portuguese and British police.

Mr Amaral's lawyers have described the case as an attack on freedom of speech and vowed to go to the European courts if he loses.

The former detective is being sued for around £1m by the McCanns in a separate libel case, and the couple have also launched criminal proceedings against a Portuguese TV channel.

TVI broadcast a documentary based on Mr Amaral's book prior to the temporary injunction, but the McCanns' lawyers believe the channel then broke the rules of the injunction by continuing to discuss the allegations against the couple.

The Mccanns, who are from Rothley in Leicestershire, will not be travelling to Portugal to hear the judge's decision.

Source: Sky News
Related: The censored book can be read in English here

The search for Maddie in pictures

Sniffer dog used in search for Madeleine McCann found missing Orkney man's body

Madeleine McCann case: The only time Eddie and Keela have apparently been wrong... according to her parents

Feb 17 2010

A SNIFFER dog used in the search for missing Madeleine McCann found a man buried in sand dunes in Orkney, a court heard yesterday.

FBI consultant Martin Grime told the High Court in Glasgow he and his springer spaniels Eddie, Keela and Morse were called in by police in the hunt for Bob Rose, who disappeared on the island of Sanday last June.

Eddie, who is trained to detect dead bodies and was used in the McCann case and the Soham murders inquiry, reacted when he was taken to sand dunes at Sty Wick on June 2.

Mr Grime said: "His normal reaction is to bark. On this occasion he started to dig."

The body of "Black Bob" Rose was later found at the spot.

The trial was also told one of the two men on trial for Bob's murder, Stephen Crummack, had indicated the area to police days before.

Detective Constable Neil Docherty said Crummack, 51, went on to blame his co-accused, John Campbell, 59, for killing Bob.

The pair deny murder and a string of related charges and the trial continues.

And so do this pair.

Source: Daily Record
Related: Eddie and Keela find body of pensioner in burnt out car

Human Rights campaigner, George Laird: Smug Gerald Patrick McCann tells reporter, 'ask the dogs, Sandra', dog replies dead body buried under sand here!

Daily Express photographer, Mike Gunnill: "The name's Bond, Mike G Bond" licensed to thrill

Just a Thought You Know forum

Tony Bennett's stalker - joining various forums to report him to Carter Ruck to help silence those who don't believe in the McCann's 'abductor' fairytale.

Above comment posted by Mike Gunnill on 'Just a thought you know' forum where he refers to using my forum to entrap Tony Bennett.

"The forum was the only place TB seemed to post, I think he thinks its a safe place where he is " looked after! ". A sort of ~safe-havern~ . It seemed the best idea at the time and I was following instructions.

Just after posting and revealing the truth I was banned and thrown out. So I repeated the posting here as that forum was trying to stop the information coming out."


Not quite true is it Mike? You said this:

1) A courier this morning at 08.00 collected the envelope, 60 Reasons book, 10 Reasons leaflet, a receipt signed by Anthony Bennett plus emails between myself and Mr Bennett. The book was purchased by contacting Mr Bennett directly via email. The money was posted to his home address in Harlow. Cash was sent ( £5 ) as payment, because I didn't want to send a cheque made payable to Mrs Bennett as requested by Anthony Bennett at the same address.

2) Mr Bennett has admitted selling a copy of 60 Reasons to me. There are two further examples but I only required proof of one sale.

3) I am grateful to this forum for allowing me to make public and open contact with Mr Anthony Bennett.

4) The third party has asked me not make any further comment or postings, which I have agreed to do. I have also agreed to make a personal statement to the third party.

If you're not going to post then not much point being a member is there? Especially a sneaky member with a hidden agenda that has nothing to do with finding the truth about what happened to Madeleine McCann, but everything to do with helping to silence the McCann's critics for Carter Ruck.


Details of Gunnill's dirty tactics can be seen here

George Laird: Team McCann taking Gonçalo Amaral to court opened the floodgates, NPIA report states the parents should be investigated

Posted by George Laird

Dear All

The decision by Gerald Patrick and Kate McCann to pursue Gonçalo Amaral was a mistake, rather than stopping information coming into the public domain they created a flood.

A National Policy Investigation report, a British private body considers that not only the abduction should be investigated but also the death of Madeleine McCann.

The report states that criminal profiler Lee Rainbow who went to Praia da Luz had 'a strong conviction of the parent’s involvement into their daughter’s disappearance'.

It seems that the McCann bubble has finally burst.

The report’s contents make for interesting reading with comments such as;

“It was Madeleine's father who was the last one to see her alive”.

“The family is a lead that should be followed”.

“The contradictions in Gerald McCann's statements might lead us to suspect a homicide".

"On June 1st 2007 British police had the theory that Madeleine could be dead and the family could be involved".

At present, the Madeleine McCann case has been archived by the Portuguese Police for the last three years.

During this time both Gerald Patrick and Kate McCann could have asked for the case to be reopened.

They did not.

The Portuguese Police need to reopen this case and start again from scratch.

The McCanns’ should be subject to an EU arrest warrant and returned to Portugal to answer questions under oath in a Court of Law as well as the Tapas 7.

Finally, is not sad that Gerald Patrick and Kate McCann are prepared to travel thousands of miles but on the night of their daughter’s disappearance they never joined the search for her themselves?

Mind you there is rather a lot of money on the table now that wasn’t available in Praia da Luz in May 2007.

I remember Gerald McCann from Glasgow University, he is the kind of person when you walk pass, you instinctively turn round and check.

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

Exclusive Video: McCanns Press Conference

The following video was recorded by a journalist, the only journalist who dared ask the McCann couple tough questions. Full details and transcript on Joana Morais

Madeleine Foundation: New Book: The Madeleine McCann Case Files Volume 1

Due to be ready 26 February

More info here

British police DID say investigate McCanns

So WHY do Leicester Police link to the McCanns fraudulent fund on the police website?

Answers and money can be sent to the McCanns in an envelope marked Kate and Gerry in Rothley and it'll get there (Clarence Mitchell: video @ 10 mins)

Madeleine McCann might have been murdered and parents could be involved


Published: Today

TENSE Kate McCann holds up a poster of missing daughter Madeleine yesterday - after hearing that a BRITISH Cracker-style criminal profiler had told Portuguese cops that the tot might have been murdered.

The startling revelation came in a Lisbon court where ex-police chief Goncalo Amaral is trying to overturn a ban on his book about three-year-old Maddie's disappearance from a holiday apartment in 2007.

The court heard that profiler Lee Rainbow told cops a month after Maddie went missing she might be dead - and that her parents Kate and Gerry could be involved.

Mr Rainbow, who heads the National Policing Improvement Agency and was involved in the Suffolk Strangler and Shannon Matthews inquiries, said there were "contradictions" in the McCanns' statements and they might be suspects.

Outside court yesterday, heart specialist Gerry said he understood that "all possibilities have to be considered".

But he called for the Maddie case to be reopened, and a panel set up to review all the evidence.

Source: The Sun

Related: McCanns appeal for Maddie (video)
Gonçalo Amaral's Defense reveals NPIA's Report which involves McCanns in Maddie's disappearence

Evidence of death found on Kate's trousers, Maddie's cuddlecat toy, behind the sofa and in the McCann's car hired 25 days after Maddie 'disappeared'

'British police said McCanns should be investigated after Madeleine went missing'

By Vanessa Allen
Last updated at 7:30 AM on 11th February 2010

Gerry McCann was made a suspect in his daughter Madeleine's disappearance after a British expert said he should be investigated for 'homicide', a Portuguese court heard yesterday.

Criminal profiler Lee Rainbow recommended that police on the Algarve investigate the doctor and his wife Kate because of 'contradictions' in his statement.

The report by Mr Rainbow, of the National Policing Improvement Agency, was sent to Portugal in June 2007, a month after the three-year-old disappeared.

It was dramatically produced yesterday by lawyers for a disgraced Portuguese detective whose campaign of vilification the McCanns are trying to stop.

The couple want Gonzolo Amaral to be legally barred from accusing them of being involved in Madeleine's disappearance.

The detective was sacked from the investigation after he made an outspoken attack on English police, accusing them of failing to investigate the McCanns. He has since retired from the police force.

His lawyer Antonio Cabrita, reading from a Portuguese translation of the previously- confidential report, said: 'The family is a lead that should be followed.

The McCanns want Gonzolo Amaral (pictured above yesterday) to be legally barred from accusing them of being involved in Madeleine's disappearance

'The contradictions in Gerald McCann's statement might lead us to suspect a homicide. This is a lead that should be investigated.'

The lawyer added: 'Portuguese police had only considered the abduction theory. It was British police who said they must consider homicide as well.'

Mr Cabrita did not outline what ' contradictions' had been found in Mr McCann's statements and refused to give any further details after the Lisbon hearing.

Mr Rainbow, 37, leads a team of five criminal profilers at the NPIA, and specialises in sex crimes and murders.

The Home Office agency, which describes itself as 'part of the police service', aims to improve police use of information, evidence and science and to support operations.

It is understood to have provided Portuguese police with a 'checklist' of how to proceed.

A spokesman said last night: 'In disappearance cases it is common for the NPIA to advise officers to consider the possibility of the involvement of family and close friends.

'This is good practice for investigating cases. The NPIA gave similar generic advice to Portuguese police.'

Mr Rainbow, who has worked on major investigations including the Ipswich prostitute murders and the disappearance of Shannon Matthews, did not say there was any evidence the McCanns were involved.

But his confidential report appears to have been a turning point in the Portuguese investigation.

Madeleine's distraught parents were named as official suspects a few weeks later, despite Portuguese police failing to find any evidence against them.

The report by Mr Rainbow, of the National Policing Improvement Agency, was sent to Portugal in June 2007, a month after three-year-old Madeleine disappeared

Mr and Mrs McCann, both 41, listened intently as Mr Cabrita said Mr Amaral should be allowed to repeat his claims that they were involved in Madeleine's disappearance.

The 50-year-old ex-detective has alleged in a new book that she died in a 'tragic accident' and her parents faked an abduction.

Lawyers for the McCanns say he is using the book and the court case to take 'revenge' on them for the end of his career.

Mr and Mrs McCann, from Rothley, Leicestershire, are suing Mr Amaral for libel over his allegations and are seeking £1.2million in damages and compensation.

They have won an injunction which bars him from repeating his allegations but he is trying to overturn it, claiming it affects his right to freedom of speech.

The hearing ended yesterday, and the judge will give her verdict next Thursday.
Kate McCann, a former GP, admitted last night that she had found it painful to listen to three days of evidence in the court. But she insisted the couple had been right to take legal action.

She said: 'I think this will truly help the search for Madeleine and that's why we have gone through with it. It hasn't been easy but if it helps, then we will go through anything.'

Read more:

Related: Gonçalo Amaral's Defense reveals NPIA's Report which involves McCanns in Maddie's disappearence
McCann case to re-open
Barking Mad

Kate and Gerry McCann said they would like the whole case reviewed by the police

Kate and Gerry McCann said the most important thing to remember is that there is still a little girl missing. from Echofon

Speaking outside the lisbon court they also said they would like the whole case reviewed by the police. from Echofon

Kate and Gerry McCann have issued a new plea to the Portuguese people to come forward with any information they might have. from Echofon

Source: hannahtp Sky News on Twitter


Well done McCanns! About time too! Maybe now we can find out what really happened to little Maddie. Just please don't take another three years to get around to it.


Fight To Ban McCann Book Enters Final Day

8:44am UK, Wednesday February 10, 2010

Hannah Thomas-Peter, Lisbon

The McCanns are set to face the final day of proceedings in their fight to uphold a ban on a book claiming they covered up the death of their daughter Madeleine.

The McCanns have always strenuously denied allegations made against them

The book, called Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie, was written by the former lead investigator in the case Goncalo Amaral.

In it, he claims that Madeleine died in the McCann family's holiday apartment and the couple faked her abduction.

Today the court is expected to hear from two witnesses who were not available during proceedings held in January.

Click below to see live tweets from the court

Eduardo Dimaso, chief editor of Correio da Manha newspaper and Luis Frois, from the company that made a documentary based on the book's claims, are likely to give evidence.

Lawyers for the McCanns and Mr Amaral will then make closing arguments.

A ruling on whether the existing temporary ban on the book is to be made permanent is expected by the end of this month.

Kate and Gerry McCann attended three days of hearings on this case in January.

Goncalo Amaral

They listened to witnesses called by Mr Amaral who backed up his version of events, including former police officers who questioned the McCanns' behaviour at the time of their daughter's disappearance.

Mr Amaral's lawyers have portrayed this legal action as an attack on the Portuguese constitution and freedom of speech.

The former policeman, who was removed from the Madeleine case after he criticised the British police, has vowed to take the case all the way to the European courts if he loses this fight to get his book published.

Speaking outside court at the end of last month's hearings, Kate McCann said listening to the allegations were difficult but nothing could be as bad as losing her daughter.

Madeleine was nearly four when she disappeared from her family's holiday apartment in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz in 2007.

Her parents were declared "arguidos" or formal suspects, in October that year, but that was lifted when the case was shelved the following summer.

The McCanns are seeking around £1m in damages for defamation from Mr Amaral in a separate case.

They strenuously deny the allegations made against them.

:: Follow live coverage of the day's proceedings in Lisbon on

Will it be banned? Maddie: The Truth Of The Lie

McCann Unravels: McCanns final day in court

Good quality wristbands: Unfinished Business: The Dogs Revisited


McCann couple returns to Portugal

Posted by Joana Morais

McCanns to be present at the final allegations on Gonçalo Amaral's book trial

The session on Wednesday of the trial over the prohibition of Gonçalo Amaral's book 'Maddie, the Truth of the Lie' will consist on the final allegations, with the presence of Kate and Gerry McCann, the parents of the missing child in the Algarve, in 2007.

In the last hearing at the 7th Civil Court of Lisbon, in Palace of Justice will also be inquired two witnesses, requested by the defense of Guerra e Paz [War & Peace], the publishers of the book by the former Judiciary Police (PJ) Inspector Gonçalo Amaral which was taken temporarily from the market in September 9, 2009.

The McCann couple, who, according to a source close to the family, will travel to Lisbon at the end of Tuesdays afternoon and will return to London on Wednesday during the afternoon, fundamented the provisional measure [the injunction] for considering unsustainable Gonçalo Amaral's thesis reproduced in the book in which both are involved in the daughter's disappearance, simulated an abduction and concealed the cadaver.

The defense witnesses heard in court argumented that Gonçalo Amaral's thesis results from the investigation, and Kate and Gerry McCann, who were present at the hearings held from the 12 to the 14 of January, denied the existence of evidences of their daughters death in a statement given to journalists.

The parents of Madeleine McCann stressed that it wasn't them who were on trial, and also stated that they did not use the courts to silence Gonçalo Amaral.

Besides the former PJ officer and Guerra & Paz, there also a target in this process TVI, which broadcast the documentary based on the book, and the production company Valentim de Carvalho, who commercialized the video.

After the decision over the injunction, a ruling that might even be decided on Wednesday, the Judge Gabriela Cunha Rodrigues will schedule the main action sessions, in which the McCann family claims for the protection of rights, freedoms and guarantees.

In running procedures is another civil action against Gonçalo Amaral, with the accusation of declarations considered defamatory, in which the British couple ask for a compensation of, at least, 1,2 million euros.

This process, without a set date for trial, has also attached an injunction, being the court developing measures for the seizure Gonçalo Amaral's assets.

Kate and Gerry McCann also lodged a criminal complaint against the former PJ Inspector for alleged violation of the secrecy of justice in the reproduction of facts pertaining to the investigation in the book before the archival dispatch made by the prosecutor of Portimão, Magalhães Menezes.

The English child Madeleine McCann disappeared on May 3, 2007 from the bedroom of an apartment in a tourist resort in Praia da Luz, Algarve, when she was on holidays with the parents and two siblings.

In the status of coordinator of the PJ Criminal Investigation Department of Portimão, Gonçalo Amaral joined the team of investigators who tried to find out what happened to Madeleine.

Kate and Gerry McCann, who always maintained the position that Maddie was abducted, were made arguidos in September 2007, but were eventually acquitted in 2008 for lack of evidence. The case was archived, but may be reopened if there is consistent data.


Jane Tanner: Who wrote your script?


By Dr Martin Roberts
07 February 2010


Okay, so 'everyone is acting, some in big ways.' (Gerry McCann on ITV, 25 May, 2007).

Jane Tanner is undeniably a member of the cast, as is crystal clear from what follows. The question is, who wrote the script? What you are about to read is not the result of a 'cut and paste error' but the literal flow of Jane Tanner's verbal responses during her Rogatory Interview with Leicestershire Police.

JT: Madeleine, if she's dead or alive, whatever, you know... maybe it is too late to find her but there's somebody out there that's done this and it's not Kate and Gerry; it's not us, you know... they can do it again and that is the... you know, they're laughing their socks off; they've just got away with this scot free and, you know... and I think it's... the thing is, they are there, then it's not us and that person is out there and, you know, could do it again and, as I say, it might be... we obviously hope not, but it could be too late for Madeleine; but a lot of other kids out there that might not be too late for, and it's just... and to sit and see, and I know... I can quite understand why that time and effort has to be put into looking down that route and... but, you know, I can't say any more but it's not... well, it's not us; it's not Kate and Gerry and it's something happened which to Madeleine that night and none of us are involved and, you know, I just don't know what else we can do to make them believe us and I think that's the... you know, and I think that's the... you know, I think that, and I don't think there is anything else we could do to believe us but, you know, we're not (inaudible), we were normal people that made a really stupid decision because we were lulled into a false sense of security from previous holidays where baby listening was offered, so I don't know."

4078: "But you have a sinking feeling inside that it was?"

JT: "Yeah, and I... yeah, and I just think, you know, they just... and, you know, at the end of the day, this person is still out there. Somebody did this and it wasn't Kate and Gerry and it wasn't any of us, you know, and it just... that is the worse thing, that person is out there; could do it again. He's absolutely, you know... they must be laughing their socks off... well... not, you know, they, so I think that's, you know... that's all we can... and I think it's just that frustration and, as I say, I mean, I can't make them believe us, and they might still not believe us, but, you know, like I say... so I'm just begging, really, that they believe us, I think it's a..."

Jane, poor tortured soul, 'can't say any more.' (For 'can't' read 'won't').

Source: mccannfiles
Good quality wristbands: Were the windows jemmied or not?
Reference: Jane Tanner rogatory interview

Carter-Ruck demands immediate removal of 'abduction scenario' article from Madeleine Foundation website

Missing Madeleine McCann
(whose Search Fund is allegedly running dry, although the McCanns can afford to retain Carter-ruck at ca £500 per hour)

By Tony Bennett, Madeleine Foundation:

In a letter dated 5 February 2010, Carter-Ruck have asked us to 'immediately' remove the article on our website, by Barbara Nottage, titled "How did the alleged abductor snatch Madeleine in a time slot of no more than 3-4 Minutes?"

Their letter claims that this article "implies that our clients have lied and that their daughter was not abducted" and is therefore "highly defamatory, casting (as it does), very serious doubt on the sugsestion that Madeleine could indeed have been abducted".

We are considering our formal response urgently.

The letter is addressed to me personally and I have provisionally made these points in my reply to Carter-Ruck dated today [8 February]:

Firstly, the facts in it have been meticulously checked and we note that in your letter you do not raise any issue as to the factual basis for it.

Secondly, the article is based entirely on statements made either by your clients themselves or by their friends who were on holiday with them, such as Jane Tanner and Dr Matthew Oldfield. It is your client Dr. Gerald McCann who states that he was in Apartment 5A until around 9.10pm on 3 May 2009 and Jane Tanner who says that it was at 9..15pm that she saw a swarthy-looking man in a dark jacket and light trousers walking ‘purposefully away’ from the direction of Apartment 5A, an observation moreover confirmed by Dr Russell O’Brien’s handwritten notes about the timeline of that evening which he wrote down on the cover of Madeleine’s Activity Sticker Book - which had been torn off for the express purpose of writing down this timeline (and an amended one written later the same evening).

Thirdly, the final paragraph of Barbara Nottage’s article explicitly states the following: “I conclude by saying that I am not saying the abduction of Madeleine never happened. But I confess I do find it very difficult to understand, given all that has been said about it, how it could have happened”.

In the meantime, here is the article, which you are free to use, subject to the warning that Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann consider it 'highly defamatory'. Barbara Nottage would appreciate the credit if it is to be reproduced anywhere.

Tony Bennett
The Madeleine Foundation

Letters sent to Carter Ruck can be seen here on HLM
and here on Little Morsals


How did the alleged abductor snatch Madeleine in a time slot of no more than 3-4 minutes?

by Barbara Nottage

One of the curious aspects of the alleged abduction of Madeleine McCann is the extraordinarily tight timetable in which the abduction is supposed to have taken place. Dr Gerald McCann says he went to check on the children at about 9.05pm on 3 May 2007. He also said elsewhere that he had been an unusually long time in the apartment toilet, and that he had been inside all four rooms of the apartment. In addition, he told the world that he had had time during his visit to gaze down on Madeleine, whom he was to describe as ‘lying in the recovery position’, and think how lucky he was to have such a beautiful daughter. By this reckoning, He could not have left the apartment until around 9.10pm or several minutes later.

Meanwhile Jane Tanner, a close friend of the McCanns, has given statements saying that she saw what she thought was a male abductor carrying Madeleine away in his arms from the apartment at around 9.15pm - although we might note here that in August 2009 at a press conference, the McCanns’ chief private investigator, former Detective Inspector Dave Edgar, said that Jane Tanner might have seen a woman, not a man.

The abduction scenario

So let’s examine this situation more closely.

The scenario put forward by the McCanns and their friends runs as follows:

· The abductor must have been watching the apartment for several days before snatching Madeleine on 3 May.
· The McCanns went down to the ‘Tapas bar’ at the Ocean Club at around 8.30pm that evening, with other members of the group arriving during the next half-an-hour or so.
· Dr Matthew Oldfield ‘checked the apartment from the outside’ at around 9.00pm to 9.03pm.
· Dr Gerry McCann returned to his apartment (5A) from the Tapas bar to check on his children at around 9.05pm. The walk to the apartment would have taken one to two minutes. So on his own timing, he would have arrived there around 9.07pm.
· Dr Gerry McCann was briefly in all four rooms of their holiday apartment, during which time he checked his children. He also says he spent an unusually long time in the toilet - maybe up to 5 minutes, though we have never been told why. He tells us that he paused briefly over Madeleine’s bed and thought to himself how very lucky he was to have such a beautiful child.
· Dr Gerry McCann says he noticed that the door to the children’s room was ‘wider open than before’. He says that at 8.30pm it had been open at an angle of about 45 degrees (half open). He remembers (he says) that when he went to check the children at 9.05pm, the door was now open at an angle of 60 degrees (two thirds open).
· The fact that the door - according to Dr Gerald McCann - was now (at 9.05pm) more open more than it was before (at 8.30pm), has been used by him to suggest the possibility that the abductor may have been already in the apartment when he checked on the children, although he says he only realised this possibility some months after the events of the day. Dr Gerry McCann has said that the abductor might have been hiding behind a door or in a wardrobe while he spent several minutes doing his ‘check’ on the children.
· Dr Gerry McCann must have left the room, on his own account, at between 9.10pm and 9.15pm. He then says he encountered a TV cameraman, Jeremy (‘Jes’) Wilkins, on the road back to the Tapas bar at the Ocean Club, and was talking to him for several minutes between 9.10pm and 9.25pm (Jeremy Wilkins confirms the meeting, but says it only lasted three minutes).
· Ms Jane Tanner (partner of Dr Russell O’Brien) says she left the Tapas bar at around 9.15pm and saw a man walking ‘purposefully’, with a child in his arms, along the top of the road running alongside the McCanns’ apartment. She has maintained throughout that she saw this man at almost exactly 9.15pm.
· The McCanns maintain that they left their apartment unlocked. This contrasts however with what they said during the might of 3 May/4 May. In telephone calls to relatives, Dr Gerald McCann told them that an abductor had forced entry into the apartment by jemmying open the shutters. They appear to have changed this story after both the Manager of Mark Warners, Mr john Hill, and the police, found no evidence whatsoever of the shutters having been forced open. The McCanns now say, therefore, that the abductor must have entered their apartment through the unlocked patio door. But they maintain that the windows and shutters that they say they found open on Dr Kate McCann checking the children at 10.00pm were because the abductor must have made his escape via that route. They say the abductor must have opened the window and the shutters (which the McCanns say they had had left closed) from the inside, climbed through the window, and taken Madeleine through that window.
· Dr Kate McCann says she returned to the apartment to check on the children at 10.00pm. She says she ‘knew instantly’ that Madeleine had been abducted - and then so did Dr Gerald McCann, minutes later, when he says he arrived at the apartment. Dr Kate McCann later told a TV interviewer that because of the requirement for secrecy about the police investigation, she could not explain why she ‘knew instantly’ that Madeleine had been abducted. She has never explained this, even 2½ years later.

The photographs of the apartment taken by the Portuguese police on the day after Madeleine was reported missing do not show anything which would clearly point to an abduction, certainly not damaged shutters. No forensic evidence whatsoever of the alleged abductor has been found. There were no forensic traces in the room, and no fingerprints on the window, window frame or shutters except for one of Dr Kate McCann’s fingerprints. The lichen on the windowsill was undisturbed.

Going by the above scenario, which the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 9’ friends have maintained, the abductor (if there was one) must have either entered the apartment before Dr Matthew Oldfield’s check at around 9.03pm and Dr Gerry McCann’s check which began at 9.05pm/9.07pm – a version put forward by the McCanns months after Madeleine was reported missing - McCanns now want us to believe - or after Dr Gerry McCann left at 9.10pm to 9.15pm and before he was (allegedly) seen by Jane Tanner at 9.15pm.

The problems with this abduction scenario

There are many problems associated with this specific abduction scenario above that the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 9’ friends have generated.

As we have seen just now, there is no forensic evidence that the alleged abductor was even in the McCanns’ apartment, still less that an abductor climbed in or out of the window.

Further, the window is high enough in the children’s room to make it physically very difficult for an abductor to climb through it. It was reported to be 91cm. above the floor - exactly three feet. The window itself is only around 60cm x 60cm (2ft x 2ft). The abductor would therefore have had to climb some three feet, with Madeleine with him, in his arms or over his shoulder. In addition, he would have to have managed this feat without leaving any forensic traces on the window-sill.

Madeleine must have weighed at least two stone (12kg). A task such as this would have meant balancing against the window frame itself, in which case traces of clothing fibres would surely have been found. Even then, it would have been almost impossible to climb through this window even if Madeleine had been asleep. It is surely even more unlikely that the abductor could have laid Madeleine down on the floor or a bed in the children’s bedroom, then climbed out of the window, and then reached back inside the bedroom to pick Madeleine out of the room - all of this without Madeleine or either of the twins waking up.

This whole abduction operation would clearly have been still more difficult either if Madeleine had woken up whilst being abducted, or one or both twins had done so. To maintain the abduction scenario, therefore, it is necessary to believe that Madeleine slept through the entire abduction operation. The description given by Jane Tanner of an alleged abductor carrying a child also describes the child as quiet and presumably asleep.

Moreover, to escape via the window, as the McCanns claim, the abductor would have had to open the shutters. Mark Warners, however, explained that it was only possible to open the shutters from the inside. They are operated by pulling a cord, or strap, on the inside. It is a highly relevant fact (again confirmed by Mark Warners) that when these heavy metal shutters were opened, the whole process is extremely noisy.

But no-one heard the shutters being opened. Moreover, the children’s room was directly overlooked by a tall block of apartments on the other side of the street. Had the abductor really climbed out of that window, he would have been in the view of dozens of windows overlooking Apartment 5A. We now know that the shutters to Apartment 5A were actually closed when the police and Mark Warners’ staff arrived to check them. The McCanns’ initial explanation for this fact were that the shutters ‘must have been closed by the abductor as well as opened by him’. We have seen that the shutters could not be opened from the outside. This claim by the McCanns that the abductor ‘must have tried to close the shutters behind him’ prompts two related and very obvious questions:

1) having gained entry through an open patio door, what would possess an abductor to leave via a three-foot high, two-foot square closed window, with the shutters also closed? The McCanns’ abduction scenario would require him to have opened the windows and shutters, then tried to close the shutters behind him, when he could have simply walked through the already-open patio doors.

2) why and how, having allegedly scooped up Madeleine in his arms and opened the window and the shutters, would he have had the time and the physical ability to then close the shutters, all without making any sound or leaving any trace, without being seen by anyone, and without waking either Madeleine or the twins?

Moreover, all this would have had to have been accomplished in the dark - unless the alleged abductor switched the lights on when he entered the apartment and then remembered to switch them off again as he was making his exit. No-one saw any lights on in the apartment. The McCanns have admitted that they left the children in the darkness, with the shutters and curtains closed, when they went out for their evening’s entertainment.

Therefore, to sum up - according to the McCanns’ scenario, the abductor would have to have:

* First - either picked an opportunity to enter the apartment after the McCanns had left for the Tapas bar at between 8.30pm and 9.00pm - or entered the apartment immediately after he had seen first Dr Matthew Oldfield and then Gerry McCann enter and leave the apartment at around 9.05pm to 9.15pm;

[NOTE: if the former of these two alternatives, then the abductor must have been in the apartment with Dr Gerry McCann during the five to ten minutes or so he was checking on the children - as Dr McCann indeed claimed last year]

* Second - walked through the open patio door without being seen;

* Third - found Madeleine in the dark;

* Fourth - picked her up, without waking her or the twins, and without leaving any forensic trace on the bed;

* Fifth - opened the window - without leaving any fingerprints;

* Sixth - opened the shutters from the inside (with nobody hearing him doing so, and once again without leaving any fingerprints);

* Seventh - climbed through the window, somehow carrying Madeleine with him - again without being seen by anyone, and again without leaving any fingerprints;

* Eighth - he would then have had to close the very noisy shutters, using controls operated from the inside - while still having Madeleine in his arms, or having laid her down on the patio, and

* Ninth - he made his escape without being seen by anyone except for afew fleeting seconds by Jane Tanner at around 9.15pm.

The operation of climbing through the window would have been physically very difficult, if not impossible, to do without (a) even brushing away even a tiny piece of the years-old lichen growing on the window-sill or (b) leaving any clothing fibres or other forensic evidence.

He must in addition have accomplished this whole operation in near total darkness and without being seen or heard by anyone except Jane Tanner. At the very moment that Jane Tanner says she saw the alleged abductor, Dr Gerald McCann was chatting away to holiday friend Jeremy (‘Jez’) Wilkins. Neither man saw or heard the alleged abductor despite being so close.

If the abductor had Madeleine in his arms as he climbed out of the window, and bearing in mind he was in near darkness, he would have been unable to see anything below her or much to either side as he fumbled through the window and shutters and tried to escape from the apartment precincts. Why he would do this when there was an open patio door to walk back through is incomprehensible. The McCanns only came up with the scenario of the abductor entering the unlocked patio door and then escaping via the window after learning that there was no evidence that the shutters had been tampered with, as they had told their relatives the night Madeleine disappeared.

Finally let us look for a moment at another aspect of the McCanns’ scenario. They have claimed on many occasions that an abductor must have been ‘casing the joint’ for several days beforehand - and then pounced and abducted Madeleine when he had the chance. The McCanns claim that he would have been closely watching them, including observing what the McCanns claim as their routine of half-hourly checking.

The McCanns have gone further and have suggested - in a lengthy TV interview for the BBC’s Panorama programme - that the abductor must have been making notes on their movements, allegedly carefully observing the times of their departures from the apartment. But this does not seem plausible given that neither the McCanns, nor their ‘Tapas 9’ friends, have given any details of how often (if at all) they were checking on their children whilst out wining and dining – apart from on the night Madeleine was reported missing.

Another problem about the McCanns’ abduction scenario is that there is nowhere that the abductor could have been observing the McCanns’ apartment without being seen - unless, that is, he was living or operating from one of the flats opposite the McCanns’ apartment, some of which overlooked it. It is understood that the occupants of these flats have all been investigated and their statements corroborated. None of them had anyone in their flat who was watching the McCanns’ apartment, nor was anyone seen acting suspiciously or hanging around in that area during the week the McCanns and their friends were there, except for one man who has been identified and eliminated from police enquiries.

The other obvious problem about the claim of an abductor ‘casing the joint’ is this:- Suppose an abductor had been watching the McCanns’ apartment day in and day out. On the McCanns’ own timeline, he would have seen the McCanns leave for the Tapas bar at 8.30pm. If, therefore, as claimed, an abductor had been watching the premises, he would presumably have chosen a moment as soon as possible after 8.30pm to abduct Madeleine - i.e., immediately after Drs Gerry and Kate McCann had left for the Tapas bar (on their own account) at around 8.30pm.

Yet, if he had entered the flat just after the McCanns left at 8.30pm, how come he was not long gone 35-40 minutes later when Dr Gerald McCann did his check? After all, Dr McCann now believes that the abductor may have even been present for the entire five to ten minutes or so that he was doing his check i.e. between 9.05pm and 9.10pm/9.15pm.

Yet a further difficulty for this improbable scenario is that Dr Matthew Oldfield claims that he did two checks - one at around 9.00pm, (various times have been given for this alleged check) and the other around 9.30pm. Dr Oldfield claims that during his 9.00pm visit he ‘checked’ from the outside but saw and heard nothing. He also said that the shutters were ‘tight shut’. If indeed the abductor really had entered before both Dr Matthew Oldfield’s alleged check (around 9.00pm) and Dr McCann’s check (around 9.05pm), then he was exceptionally lucky, to put it mildly, not to have been detected by either man.

There are equal if not even greater problems with the suggestion that the abductor entered the apartment and removed Madeleine only after Drs Oldfield and McCann had done their checks. Would any abductor really have dashed into the apartment after first seeing Dr Oldfield checking the outside of the apartment at around 9.00pm - and then seen Gerry spending five to ten minutes checking between 9.05pm and 9.15pm? It would surely have been far too risky.

And if he entered the apartment after Dr Gerry McCann left at say 9.10pm at the earliest, he would scarcely have had time to enter the flat, remove Madeleine, open the window and shutters, close them behind him etc. and then be seen by Jane Tanner at 9.15pm.

Sadly, no British newspaper or magazine has offered an analysis, like the one above, of the unlikelihood of the abduction having occurred in the way the McCanns and their ‘Tapas 9’ friends claim it ‘must have’ happened.

I conclude by saying that I am not saying the abduction of Madeleine never happened. But I confess I do find it very difficult to understand, given all that has been said about it, how it could have happened.


What did Donal MacIntyre say about the abduction theory which was published in the Sunday Express?

1) Highly organised.

2) There were at least 2 perpetrators.

3) The kidnappers had prior access to the layout of the flat here in 5a before the kidnap.

4) These were men who were well versed in the art of house breaking and these men also had an ability to clean a crime scene.

Critical to this investigation is the timing. There was 3-5 minutes for the kidnappers to perpetrate this crime. Consider the pressure the kidnappers were under.

They had to stay hidden in the apartment in the company of Gerry McCann for up to 10 minutes.

2) They had to subdue Madeleine McCann, a notorious bad sleeper and bring her out of the apartment.

3) They had to bring her out of a small window for which they required at least 2 perpetrators.

4) They had to escape the vicinity of the complex and the entire area without suspicion.

In addition, highly likely they cleaned the crime scene and this required great planning and precision and could not have been the work of an opportunist drifter.

Madeleine McCann Fund a scam?

By John Hirst - Justice for Madeleine

When I first heard that the McCanns intended setting up a “Fighting Fund”, I wondered why and who or what were they fighting against?

“Before its launch the fund had already raised £10,000 from medical colleagues of Gerry and Kate McCann and from a bucket of money filled up by visitors to Leicester’s Glenfield Hospital, where Madeleine’s father works“.

There is money to be made out of this.

Madeleine’s Fund created,

Companies House ‘Current Appointments Report’ shows that Madeleine’s Fund – Leaving No Stone Unturned Limited’ was created on this day:

Current Appointments Report for:

company was created 12th May 2007

It was initially set up, on behalf of the McCanns, in 48 hours, by the International Family Law Group (IFLG). This does appear to be something of a rush job. When jobs are rushed mistakes can be made.

Business, charity, or scam?

“It is thought the original idea was to set the fund up as a charity but this was rejected, according to The Times, when it became clear that a charity cannot be operated for the sole benefit of one person. The Charity Commission later denied this.

One of the things that distinguishes a limited company from a charity is that it does not have all the rules and regulations which govern the conduct of the fundraising and which controls the proportion of the charities funds that are spent on overheads, expenses and wages etc.

It was also reported at the time that the Charity Commission was extremely disturbed at the way the Fund was being advertised as it gave people the impression that they were donating to a charity – not a private limited company.

The reality is, however unpalatable, that Madeleine’s Fund is a private limited company and can therefore spend the money donated in any way it so chooses. The memorandum of association is so wide that practically any expenditure could be approved by the board of directors“.

Not for the first time do we have a dispute with the McCann version of events and that given by someone else or by an organisation. I think it is possible, for example, to set up a charity in aid of a child dying from cancer. If this is the case, then there is no reason why the McCanns could not have registered their cause as a charity. The problem from their end would be the lack of control exercised by the McCanns. So, it was decided to set up a company instead. Nevertheless, some people still labour under the mistaken belief that the Madeleine Fund is a charity. Even allowing for the McCann statements that it is not a charity, I feel that the false impression remains in some people’s minds because of the way that the McCanns keep aligning themselves to charities, and misleading reporting in the media such as this from the recent McCanns fund raising event “The £90,000 raised will be split between the Maddie Fund and two other missing people’s charities“. It implies that the Madeleine Fund is a charity. I have yet to see any demand made by the McCanns to correct this false information. Given that the McCanns have a history for wanting corrections made in the media on stories concerning themselves, why is there silence on their part?

Having established that the Madeleine Fund is not a charity, the focus turns to the question of a business or scam. An indication that the McCanns are in the business to make money, is their distasteful application to brand their missing 3 year old child as a trademark.

Trademark application filed

The campaign to find Madeleine McCann has applied for British and European trademarks to protect its fundraising, internet and print promotions. The applications, which were filed on May 18, seek to protect the name “Madeleine’s Fund: Leaving No Stone Unturned”. The European application also seeks protection for the provision of social services and advice for people affected by missing children.

It appears as though the McCanns are laying claim to be the only persons entitled to earn money out of Madeleine’s disappearance. This does not sit well with the English law principle that criminals should not profit from their crimes. It is accepted that the McCanns have so far not been convicted of any criminal offence in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine. So, they remain innocent until proven guilty.

Bringing the McCanns to account is a long drawn out process. It will help if the Madeliene Fund is attacked successfully in the courts. It is hoped by doing this that rich backers like Brian Kennedy and Richard Branson will have a rethink about keep funding the McCanns.

I noted that it was originally stated that the McCanns would not use the Madeleine Fund in their criminal defence. And yet, the Madeleine Fund has been used to pay for the McCanns legal fight against Mr Amaral. The published accounts do not refer to it being used for this purpose in relation to Madeleine, but the court injunction clearly refers to Madeleine as being one of the claimants in the case. Once again we have an inconsistency from the McCann Camp.

It’s a business we are dealing with. I question the not for profit aspect. Accepting it is a business does not rule out the possibility that it is also a scam. Those conducting scams are in the business of making money. A legitimate business is not a scam, and a scam is not a legitimate business. My suspicion is that what we are really dealing with here is a scam. I do not have enough evidence to support a criminal beyond all reasonable doubt standard of proof, however, the civil standard of balance of probabilities does not look good for the McCanns.

Madeleine McCann: The heart of the matter


By Dr Martin Roberts
04 February 2010


When Uncle John sat down to write his Chairman's Report on the fiscal activities of Madeleine's Fund for the last trading year, one person was certainly not uppermost in his mind. Clearly focussed on his schoolboy pun, he managed to omit Madeleine's name from the rosta of previously nominated litigants in the libel case against Goncalo Amaral. The date on which Madeleine was 'taken' seems also to have been forgotten, as elsewhere (the Director's Report, signed off by Brian Kennedy, Madeleine's great-uncle), the 3rd May 2008 is referenced. Not just 'a day late and a dollar short', but a full twelve months.

Perhaps Messrs. McCann and Kennedy do not quite attach the same importance to their niece/great-niece as do her parents. But if we look for evidence of how Madeleine stands in their regard, she seems to fare little better.

KM: "So it's difficult to hear something that's incorrect and inaccurate. At the bottom of all this is a little girl, and I think it's important that we don't forget that."

Madeleine is not identified as being at the heart, or even centre of events. But that shouldn't surprise us unduly, since she never was.

Interviewed by Jane Hill (BBC):

GM: "Yeah, I mean, without doubt, they... they help us to continue, you know. This is every parent's worst nightmare and everyone can feel and imagine what we've gone through but, you know, if we'd had discovered all three of the children had gone or if something else had happened, then, you know, we... we'd not have had the same strength and resolution and determination to find Madeleine that Sean and Amelie give us, as well, because we know that they're there, errr... life continues but we need to bring them back... bring Madeleine back as much for them, as for Madeleine, as for us."

There is no ambiguity here. It is Sean and Amelie who imbue the parents with the determination to find Madeleine. Were they to be missing as well, then so would that determination. In such an event the twins need of rescue comes first ('them' does not include Madeleine initially. She is mentioned separately). The need to bring Madeleine back is then measured in terms of the twins first, Madeleine second.

Announcing their intention to suppress Goncalo Amaral via a libel action, Gerry again puts Madeleine in her place.

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

"...,the other action is about the damage that's caused to ourselves, our children and Madeleine, obviously."

Suddenly Madeleine is not so much one of the children as an afterthought.

And, with thanks to Anna Andress for bringing the following to light, according to a statement by Katherina Gasper (a doctor who holidayed with the McCanns and their friends in 2005):

"During our stay in Majorca, Dave and his wife, Fiona, accompanied by their daughter Lily, took Madeleine with them to spend the day, in order to give Kate and Gerry a bit of rest and time to be with the twins."

Amongst the questions Kate McCann refused to answer when made arguida, is one which raises more questions concerning Madeleine's place in the family:

"When asked whether or not it is true that in England she considered the possibility of handing over Madeleine's guardianship to a relative, she did not reply."

Perhaps we should not be too surprised at Uncle John and Great-Uncle Brian's errors and omissions after all.

Express photographer, Mike Gunnill and his entrapment of Tony Bennett

Dirty tactics: Daily Express photographer, Mike Gunnill takes on an anonymous identity to trap Tony Bennett for the McCanns and Carter Ruck:

This has been posted on Chaos Raptors news site:

mikegunnill Today at 9:09 am

Link to post On Jill Havern's Forum

1) A courier this morning at 08.00 collected the envelope, 60 Reasons book, 10 Reasons leaflet, a receipt signed by Anthony Bennett plus emails between myself and Mr Bennett. The book was purchased by contacting Mr Bennett directly via email. The money was posted to his home address in Harlow. Cash was sent ( £5 ) as payment, because I didn't want to send a cheque made payable to Mrs Bennett as requested by Anthony Bennett at the same address.

2) Mr Bennett has admitted selling a copy of 60 Reasons to me. There are two further examples but I only required proof of one sale.

3) I am grateful to this forum for allowing me to make public and open contact with Mr Anthony Bennett.

4) The third party has asked me not make any further comment or postings, which I have agreed to do. I have also agreed to make a personal statement to the third party.


Mike as you will recall was on the receiving end of a particularly nasty personal attack led by Steve Marsden, the web master of the then Madeleine Foundation website. In reaction to this attack Mike regrettably had to close down his website during this attack. The nature of this attack will not be of any great surprise to anyone who has been unlucky enough to be targeted by the old 3 Arguidos mob, however they all made a huge mistake by choosing to attack Mike and to class him as being part of a greater conspiracy that involves ex-moderators of the 3 Arguidos, people who have openly criticised the hatred nurtured on Ryan and Sluming's website, bloggers and of course members of the Raptors team.

Mr Bennett I understand was fully aware of the legal bindings issued to him by Carter Ruck, the London based legal team that act for the McCanns. In selling the Foundation's Reasons booklet to Mike he has by all accounts broken this agreement.

The ramifications of such an action are very serious indeed.

End of post on Chaos Raptors
It should be noted that Mike Gunnill joined ex 3As mods forum - Just a Thought You Know - and my forum with the sole intention of setting up Tony Bennett.

And this is the run of emails that Mike Gunnill was invited to post on the forum, but declined. Chaos Raptors also haven't published them along with Mike Gunnill's statement. They were posted by Tony Bennett on the forum and posted here to show both sides of the story.

From: "Michael Sangerte"
Wednesday 13 January, 3.52pm

Dear Mr Bennett

I have received your email address after asking for help. I am trying to purchase the 60 Reason book urgently and can't find it anywhere.

I will pay a good price, please help if you can. Please state your price including first class postage.

Thank you

Michael Sangerte
Reading. Berkshire.


From Tony Bennett,
Wednesday13 January, 4.19pm

Dear Mr Sangerte

At present due to a Court undertaking I signed in November I am not allowed to sell or distribute '60 Reasons'.

If you simply wish to view the contents, there are several places where you can read the entire work, Wikileaks is one of them, another is on the 'hardlinemarxist' website, here:

If you particualry want an actual printed copy I could speak to one of our members or one of those who has bought our book in the past and they may be prepared to sell you on their copy. Let me know if you wish to pursue this.

That is all I can do now.

Tony Bennett
The Madeleine Foundation
01279 635789


From: "Michael Sangerte"
Wednesday 13 January, 4.37pm

Dear Mr Bennett

I did really want a copy of the book. I feel this will be an important document in history. I would be grateful for any further help

Michael Sangerte


From: Tony Bennett
Wednesday 13 January, 4.42pm

I will make enquiries and revert to you ASAP.

Tony Bennett


Friday 22 January, 10.24pm

Dear Mr Sangerte

I have at last located a copy of '60 Reasons'.

If you would like me to arrange to send it to you, please send a cheque for £5.00 made out to 'Maria Bennett' to the address below and, on receipt, I will arrange for a copy to be sent to you.

Tony Bennett
66 Chippingfield
CM17 0DJ


Letter from Michael Sangerte to Tony Bennett, enclosing £5 note, sent 23 January 2010:

Dear Mr Bennett

I enclose £5 in cash for payment of the 60 Reasons book.

I am most pleased you managed to locate a copy for me. I am grateful. My address is below.

Thank you again and may I wish you well with your efforts.




The booklet was sent to him on Thursday 28 January.

It will be interesting if this leads to McCann v. Bennett in the High Court.

Dr Gerald McCann: I call my first witness, Michael Sangerte. Mr Sangerte, why did you e-mail Mr Bennett on 13 January?

Mr Sangerte: Mike Gunnill put me up to it. I said I lived in Reading, but that was a lie. I didn’t want my e-mails published. It wasn’t because I thought this would be an important document in history. That was another lie.

Dr. Gerald McCann: I call my second witness, Mike Gunnill, a.k.a. Peter Trawin, a.k.a Jason Peter, a.k.a. ‘petert’ on the JustAThoughtYouKnow forum. He appears today as Mike Gunnill. Mike, why did you put Mr Sangerte up to getting hold of a booklet from Mr Bennett?

Mr Gunnill: Um, on behalf of you and your wife, I was helping Carter-Ruck to get evidence against him.

Letter sent to Carter Ruck can be seen here on HLM


It's a pity that the media don't spend as much time investigating the disappearance of Maddie McCann as they do helping the McCanns silence those who don't believe their version of events.

And here's some more Team McCann websites - nice aren't they?: (which Mike Gunnill and his journalist friend Peter Tarwin frequents)
Gunnill has also joined Missing Madeleine forum

Gunnill admits he was following instructions:

Portuguese Media Lawyer: Amaral can go to the European Court of Human Rights

The banned book can be read here: Maddie the truth about the lie

Child Rapists Protected By The State

by Robert Green

In the October 2009 print edition of the UK Column, we reported in our article “BBC Hides Truth of Girl’s Sexual Abuse Ordeal” the shocking ordeal of Downs Syndrome girl, Hollie Greig, who was horribly abused by an Aberdeen paedophile ring, over a period of ten years. After investigating and planning a documentary, the BBC abruptly dropped the case, despite admitting that Hollie was a reliable and accurate witness. It is important to stress that both the police and qualified medical experts have described Hollie as a competent and entirely honest witness.

From the age of just six, Hollie was repeatedly sexually abused by her father, Denis Charles Mackie. Later, Mackie began sharing his daughter with a gang of paedophile “swingers” that has been operating in Aberdeen for many years. The identities of a further seven child victims are already known. There is no question that the gang are well-connected, efficiently organised and totally ruthless. Our frightening story is that they are protected by individuals of “high standing” within the Scottish establishment.

In 2000, after 14 years of terrified silence, Hollie eventually told her mother, Anne, about the abuses. Formal statements were made to Grampian Police, providing all the horrifying details and the names of the abusers. They included a senior Scottish Sheriff, a policeman, social workers, a nurse, a solicitor, an accountant, a fire officer, married couples and others. Some of the rapes were carried out at the homes of these individuals, including that of the Sheriff’s sister. Other children were sometimes involved, including children of the paedophiles themselves.

The latest chapters in this astonishing and horrifying story about Hollie, and the seven other abused children, have taken place over the past few weeks. The key issues are a continued refusal by Grampian police to fully investigate the overwhelming evidence for the paedophile rapes, and a wall of silence by the Scottish establishment.

Whilst there has been some general Scottish media coverage, notably in The Firm and the Aberdeen Press and Journal, the media has been largely silent on what must be one of Scotlands worst top level paedophile scandles. A key figure in the press silence is the Lord Advocate, in her former role as Procurator Fiscal in Aberdeen, when in 2000 she is alleged to have effectively buried the case. Was this to prevent her associate and most influential member of the paedophile ring, Sheriff X, from being investigated, along with the other named members of the fifteen-strong rape gang?

Elish Angiolini, the Scottish Lord Advocate, is in charge of all criminal prosecutions. She is alleged to have reacted immediately to public calls for a full police investigation, by pressurising against publication. Subsequently, and under considerable duress, The Firm published an apology. Shortly afterwards the Press and Journal ran a story accurately describing the case, mentioning a sheriff and police officer without identifying them. Angiolini was not discussed in the article.

Mrs Angiolini`s role in the case recently aroused further suspicion, when it was claimed that she had used a private law firm, Levy and McRae, to issue warnings against all major Scottish editors, threatening them with legal action if any mention was made of her involvement in the case. Suspicious and angry, many individuals directly working to obtain justice for Hollie, as well as a growing number of the general public, now consider that key establishment figures, many with direct responsibility for criminal investigations and justice, have made a concerted and continuous effort to conceal the facts from the people of Scotland. Despite the pressure, investigators and campaigners for Hollie continue to stress that they hold documentary proof of the Lord Advocate’s actions, as well as proof that she has repeatedly failed to tell the whole truth about her connections with the Hollie abuse case for whatever reason.

The senior partner in the Law Firm, Peter Watson, who is also head of litigation, is understood to have refused to comment as to whether the firm’s fees have been billed to Mrs Angiolini personally, or if they are being paid by the Scottish taxpayer.

Mrs Angiolini’s office decided in December 2009 that they would not pursue the case due to “insufficient evidence.” Corroborating evidence by private investigators and researchers indicates that other than Hollie, not one of the twenty-four named abusers and victims has even been questioned by Grampian Police.

This follows the pattern of 2000, when the crimes and perpetrators were first reported. At that time, the police later admitted that only one of the gang, Hollie`s father, had even been interviewed.

The UK Column is aware that investigators have just received from the Crown Office, after years of rebuttals, the Post Mortem report of Robert David Greig, brother of Hollie`s mother Anne. Robert died mysteriously in an alleged car fire in 1997. Despite extreme inconsistencies in witness statements and circumstances, no inquest took place and the cause of death was officially due to smoke inhalation.

The Post Mortem stated that Robert has suffered considerable damage to his skull, two broken ribs and a broken sternum. Informal professional medical opinion so far is of the view that Robert had been severely beaten, had alcohol forced down his throat and then thrown into the burning vehicle.

Although this was not known at the time, Hollie, in 2001, told her mother that just prior to his unexplained death, Robert had caught Hollie`s father sexually abusing her.

The campaign for justice for Hollie, and other vulnerable victims of paedophiles in England and South Wales, not only goes on, but has intensified as outraged members of the public have flooded Aberdeen with leaflets naming all current members of the gang, including the head of a special school. All Aberdeen Councillors and MPs have also been alerted, but with little effect. There appears to be a conspiracy of establishment silence where the abuse of Hollie is concerned. Many people in Aberdeen are asking just who possesses the courage and decency to stand up against these staggering and shocking crimes against most vulnerable members of society? Certainly not their elected national and local representatives.

UK Column volunteers continue to be shocked by the quantity and quality of evidence reaching them on the subject of paedophile and sexual abuse against young and vulnerable children in care and otherwise. The common theme is that victims and their supporters are unable to get any real support from Members of Parliament, Local Councillors, the Judiciary, Police and other ‘officials’. Many describe the creation of a wall of silence, often accompanied by targetted intimidation against the victims.

Recently a policeman personally told the UK Column that police had themselves experienced their own paedopile investigations suddenly being dropped by senior police officers. He added “If you want to really get to the paedophiles you should look at Westminster”. The implications of this statement are frightening – a paedophile ring amongst our political leaders – the political elite which has control of education and Social Services? The general public needs to open its eyes and confront this evil – and fast.

Source: UK Column

Comedian Jack Dee raises £45k for McCann's fraudulent mortgage fund

Jack Dee: Warning contains strong language

Last week marked 1,000 days since the disappearance of British girl, Madeleine McCann, who vanished in 2007 at the age of three while on vacation with her family in Portugal. To help raise money on the occasion, comedian Jack Dee assisted in raising £45,000 (about $72,000 USD) to maintain the search for the little girl.

Dee acted as the event’s auctioneer, selling items that were donated by JK Rowling, such as signed Harry Potter books, and items from Virgin magnate, Richard Branson.

According to the Daily Star, Madeleine's parents, Kate and Gerry McCann, invited Rowling, Branson, UK radio personality Nicki Campbell, and Scottish tycoon Brian Kennedy to attend the soiree, which took place at The Roof Gardens in Kensington, west London.

About 180 celebrities and other supporters were present at the event—with each attendee paying £150 per ticket ($250 USD).

According to the Sunday Express, the entire amount raised will be split between the fund to help search for Madeleine and two other missing person’s charities.

Source: Examiner

Gerry McCann: Warning contains strong language (even in front of tiny children)

Statement from The Madeleine Foundation 2.2.2010

The Madeleine Foundation
Asking the questions about what really happened to Madeleine McCann
Registered address:

66 Chippingfield, HARLOW, Essex CM17 0DJ


Tel: 01279 635789

Near Nottingham East Midlands Airport
Issued 2 February 2010

Dear Members, Supporters and Followers

1. Gonçalo Amaral unable to attend our Conference

We’re sorry to report that we have now heard from Snr Gonçalo Amaral that he is, after all, unable to attend our Conference. As you know, he and his wife enthusiastically accepted our invitation last August. In anticipation of his visit, we had made a booking for him and his wife at a top East Midlands hotel.

Since then, however, he has become involved in three separate sets of litigation. First of all, a civil libel suit which has already resulted in his book: ‘The Truth About A Lie’ being banned in his native Portugal and which recently needed a 3-day court hearing. The McCanns are claiming damages of 1.2 million euros against him - over £1 million. There will be a further hearing about this matter later this month.

In addition, his appeal is under way in relation to his conviction last year as a result of which he received a suspended 18-month jail sentence for allegedly filing a false report in the notorious case of Joana Cipriano..

In this respect we remind readers that it was Gonçalo Amaral and his team of detectives that succeeded in bringing the cruel mother and uncle of 8-year-old Joana to trial for her murder. They are now behind bars for 20 years for their wicked crimes. They had told police originally that Joana had been abducted.

Yet in what The Madeleine Foundation has no hesitation in calling a political show trial last year, lies from Joana’s mother and from staff at the Odemira prison where Leonor Cipriano was in prison awaiting trial led to Snr Amaral’s conviction in what we say were trumped-up political charges. His appeal has been delayed for inexplicable reasons by the Portuguese authorities. He is desperate to clear his name.

On top of all that, he faces a further criminal trial in relation to more allegations, which we once again believe to be wholly false, made by the former partner of Leonor Cipriano.

Unsurprisingly, therefore, in an e-mail message we received late last week, Gonçalo Amaral wrote to us:

“Dear Mr Bennett,

Thank you very much for your email, and for the support that you express. I would like to thank you for the invitation for your Foundation's conference. Unfortunately, due to professional and personal commitments, it will not be possible for me to attend. I wish you much success in your endeavours to assist in the discovery of truth and the pursuit of justice. Best regards,

Gonçalo Amaral

2. Madeleine Foundation Conference 27/28 February 2010 to go ahead

We shall still be holding our Conference, over two days, as promised, at a venue within 10 miles of Nottingham East Midlands Airport. For those travelling by train, we can tell you that the nearest rail station will be Nottingham Central. There is a good public transport connection from there to our venue.

As with our other conferences, all are welcome who genuinely question the McCanns’ account of events in Praia da Luz. Please register with us beforehand. Only those pre-registered will be able to attend. The actual venue will be disclosed by e-mail or telephone to all those who have registered with us before the event.

The Conference venue will be open Saturday 27th 12noon to 6..00pm and Sunday 28th 10.00am to 4.00pm. The Annual General Meeting of The Madeleine Foundation, for members only, will take place there on the Sunday from 1.00pm to 4.00pm.

3. Committee Meeting 23 January 2010

The Committee of The Madeleine Foundation met on 23 January and a separate report will be sent to members.

4. New book: “The Madeleine McCann Case Files: Volume 1”

This book, which presents to the public eight of the key documents in the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann released publicly by the Portuguese police, is with our printers and will be out we hope by the end of February. Foundation members will receive a free copy. The cover price of £4.00 includes postage to any U.K. destination and, as with our ‘60 Reasons’ booklet, is intended only to cover costs.

5. Report by Chairman Grenville Green on his visit to Lisbon for the McCann v. Amaral libel trial, 11 to 16 January

“Because I feel strongly about the verbal abuse directed at the Portuguese police in our British media regarding the McCann case, I felt compelled to travel to Lisbon to show my support for Gonçalo Amaral at the 3-day hearing in January.

“I flew out with my son Stephen, who has Down’s Syndrome, on 11 January and on the following day I was able to stand outside the Palasio da Justice, the Courthouse in Lisbon, where Gonçalo Amaral was defending his right of free speech, enshrined in Article 37.0 of the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic.

“I held up two notices, in English, reading: ‘Freedom and Democracy on Trial in Lisbon’ and ‘Portuguese Republic Constitution on Trial in Lisbon’.

“The British press in general do not report fairly on Snr Amaral and, in my experience, do not always report the truth. The latest insults to his integrity were the recent report on the BBC and certain tabloids that he had said ‘F___ the McCanns’ just before the hearing to a British reporter. He speaks very little English and first reports said he had actually said: ‘Nao, forca aos McCanns’ which translates as ‘No, good luck to the McCanns’. Later, Snr Amaral clarified that he’d actually said ‘Nao, fala com McCanns’, which our Portuguese friends say translates as ‘No, speak to the McCanns’.

“This vilification in the British press is typical of the ignorance and biased reporting of elements of the media regarding this case. To obtain an accurate over-view, including world-wide comments, I would encourage you to read the internet site of Joana Morais.

“I demonstrated in support of Snr Amaral outside the court, then attended the hearing for two-and-a-half days.

“On the Thursday evening, my son and I went to a fund-raising dinner at Frei Antonio, a restaurant in Mafra (approx 30 miles from Lisbon).. We were warmly welcomed, and one woman we met there told us about her demonstration outside the court. She had handed out red carnations which have come to symbolise a peaceful revolution in Portugal's history. She had offered a symbolic flower to a VIP who had refused to take it. When asked why, he had replied: ‘I don't believe in it’. She asked, ‘What don't you believe in, peaceful revolution or free speech?’

“That evening I purchased Snr Amaral's second book, just published, entitled: ‘A Mordaca Inglesa - a historia de um livro proibido” (The English Gag - the story of a banned book). It’s an account of the banning of his first book and the attempt by the British government, as he sees it, to silence a Portuguese citizen.

“This Police Inspector, on a matter of principle, had found it necessary to leave the job he loved - incurring loss of income and substantial loss of pension rights - in order to write his first book, ‘Maddie: The Truth About a Lie’. It dealt with the evidence he uncovered as senior detective in the Madeleine McCann case.

“We reluctantly had to leave our new-found friends as the taxi was waiting. Snr Amaral shook my hand warmly and agreed to be photographed with us. I was left with a profound impression of a man with a depth of character who was gentle, thoughtful and warm. Several people had spoken that evening to warm applause, thus showing their unshakable admiration for his courage. The McCanns’ libel action against him continues in February, but my fear is that decisions have already been made. I hope and pray that I am proved wrong and that Portugal's constitution prevails!”

6. Book by Stephen Marsden: ‘Faked Abduction’

It has been reported that our former webmaster, Mr Steve Marsden, is to publish a book on the Madeleine McCann case called ‘Faked Abduction’. Whilst we may well agree with much of its contents, we cannot recommend this book to the public. From what we have learned, Mr Marsden is intending to reproduce the contents of Snr Amaral’s book without the permission of him or his publishers. Moreover, we understand that he is making use of a translation of the book into English by a lady called ‘Anna’, once again without her permission. We cannot possibly support a book which, from our understanding, is guilty of a double plagiarism. Furthermore, unlike The Madeleine Foundation books which are priced only to cover costs, we understand that Mr Marsden intends to profit from the sale of his book.

7. Further information
Here are our contact details:

Grenville Green (Chairman) and Helene Davies-Green

Tony Bennett (Secretary) 01279 635789 Mobile 07835 716537

Sharon Lawrence (Treasurer)


PeterMac's Free e-book: What really happened to Madeleine McCann?

Gonçalo Amaral's 'Maddie: Truth of the Lie

Richard D. Hall: 'When Madeleine Died?'

Richard D. Hall: 'When Madeleine Died?'
Please click on image to view all three Madeleine films

Prime Minister introduces Prime Suspect to Royalty

Prime Minister introduces Prime Suspect to Royalty

Popular Posts


Follow by Email

Contact Form


Email *

Message *