First an Addendum to previous chapters
After publication of Chapter 31: Jon Clarke – Olive Press LIES and VIDEOTAPE
and Chapter 32: ON LIES AND CONSPIRACIES
I have been contacted by several people who made important and trenchant observations.
I now realise that I have fallen into my own logical trap. I presented some of the case as a choice. Often called the ‘black and white’ fallacy; false dichotomy or dilemma, or the either/or, it is fallacious because other possibilities may exist, but here I was clearly in error by suggesting that two statements by Jon Clarke were mutually exclusive.
“When I arrived at about 11.45am I was firstly able to walk into the apartment, where I introduced myself to the McCanns”
- Versus -
“I said hello to them as they were leaving and introduced myself to them as a reporter from the Mail, and they said “Hi”, and I think they may have also said “thanks for coming”.
I suggested it had to be one or the other, or neither, but not both.
But it is now more clear that in a real sense BOTH could be correct.
Ignore the nonsense about the apartment and times and places, and concentrate instead on the message Clarke is trying to impart.
It need not be the exact words he used. It may not even be any of the words he used, but he is clearly trying to convey information. To get a point across.
So let us roll the quotes together. [Note - this is my elision, Clarke is not on record as saying this]
** “I said hello and introduced myself to them as the reporter from the Mail, and told them I would do everything I could to help, and they said “Hi”, and I think they may have also said “Thanks for coming”. **
Does that sound feasible ? If so, then even more serious questions remain.
Does this imply that the McCanns knew that the Mail were sending a reporter, and were therefore not surprised by his arrival, even thanking him for coming ?
– – – – –
A second issue was also raised.
It is always useful to go back to the core material. It helps us keep our eye on the squirrel.
So IF Kates' reported arrival of the PJ, and the discussions about what to do with the children took place at all, they MUST have been significantly before 1000, or DW would not have had time to round the children up, walk them round the pool and sign them in at 1010.
They were still 2 years old. Difficult to 'herd' at the best of times, and with the PJ and GNR and dogs and vans and traffic and reporters milling around, must have been a nightmare.
[ had they already come to an agreement that the children would not be photographed . . .?]
from KM’s book.
“It was about 10am by the time a couple of PJ officers turned up. . . .They told us they had to take us and our friends to the police station in Portimão. We couldn’t all go at once as somebody needed to look after the children. After some discussion, it was agreed that Gerry and I, Jane, David and Matt would be interviewed first and the PJ would come back for the others later in the day.”
The implication is clear. Kate is expecting us to believe that this is the first time they had realised they would need to go to a police station or make statements, and that until that point no thought had been given by anyone within the group to the logistics, nor to Child-care arrangements. How long the “some discussion” took is not explained.
Whether any of this is even credible is another matter entirely.
The three possible routes for DW and the children are shown here
5G, down stairs, through car park right, right again, right again though pool reception, to Tapas bar crèche = 160m
5G, down stairs, short cut through apartment 5C or D, out of garden, left onto footpath, right onto road, right again though pool reception, to Tapas bar crèche = 130m
5G, down stairs, through car park left, left again along footpath, right, then right though pool reception, to Tapas bar crèche = 200m
So for about 10am, we may now perhaps force it as far as a bit BEFORE 10 am
Which gets them out of 5H very soon after 1000, into the car, and off to the PJ in Portimão, to do all the necessary things
before settling down and hitting the record button on the tape machine with GM at 1115
WHICH in turn puts Jon Clarke in PdL and at the scene at the very latest by 1000, and given his relaxed body language with the group of reporters and the GNR Inspector, possibly even earlier.
Which in turn pushes his Phone call from the UK even more firmly to 0600 Spanish summer time = 0500 BST
– – – – –
But now to the purpose of this Chapter
In his 2017 article Jon Clarke wrote
“The only reporter on the scene till late that evening – apart from Sky News reporter Kate Burley, who happened to be on holiday there – I spent time grilling neighbours, before noticing that a road crew was still digging up the street to lay sewage pipes literally right outside the apartment. The trench was nearly two metres deep and three men continued to shuffle around inside it.
Nobody had stopped them.’
Until recently most thinking people had passed quickly over the first few of the five distinct and separate lies in that one sentence, and then just assumed that describing a trench as “literally right outside the apartment” was simple hyperbole, just journalistic exaggeration, overstatement, embellishment, magnification, and “puffery’ which could be cheerfully ignored.
But then in 2019 came the Netflix production, prepared and filmed largely in 2018.
In it Clarke lies yet again. As we have seen earlier his ludicrous assertion that he was the only, or the first, journalist on the scene was simply untrue. His contention that there were no dogs, that the police were not treating the issue seriously, and so much else of what he wrote and said is simply a catalogue of lies.
Now he goes even further.
Now he stands immediately outside Apartment 5A on Rua Dr. Francisco Gentil Martins, just south of the junction with Rua Dr. Agostino da Silva, a few metres from the infamous Tannerman location.
Now he faces south, down the hill towards the Pool reception and the Baptista supermarket.
Now direct to camera he says
“There was a big trench here, from about here going down . . . leading down from here,
all the way down the road about this wide, and six foot deep.
And there was two or three guys working in the trench . .
And you think . . . could she have fallen down there.“
‘here’ is said three times, There is absolutely no doubt about the location.
He is standing on an exact spot and pointing.
When he says “literally right outside the apartment” he intends us to believe him.
He desperately wants us to believe him. He demands that we believe him.
He expects the word “literally” to be taken literally.
That piece to camera in the 2019 Netflix video is in tight close up, so the background is out of focus. Nevertheless it is easy to see where Clarke was when this was filmed.
Usefully the Netflix production also uses multiple video clips and photos from May 2007.
We start where Clarke comes into left frame. We see the overhanging hedge and the dark red bougainvillea beyond. The break in the building line is a clear focal point.
(Reference is Netflix, E1, S1, at 14:07)
But the problem is – ALL THIS IS UNTRUE
Clarke knows it is untrue
Clarke knows it will be checked
Clarke knows he will be exposed as a serial liar
Clarke knows that video and photos exist from 2007 which prove he is lying.
Clarke knows that anyone watching Netflix can immediately see that he is lying.
But still he goes ahead.
A glance at “google maps –> Street view” will clarify the situation. These shots are dated September 2018
Clarke had the option of simply not saying it, or perhaps of making it a passing throwaway remark,
but chose, quite deliberately, to Lie
To coin a neologism – “if you find yourself in a trench, stop digging”
Is Clarke somehow committed to fantasy, to untruth, to pure invention, or as we now must term it – to LYING ?
These are stills taken from the very same Netflix production.
They are not from any outside source. They are contained in that same 50 minute film.
Everyone seeing the film may confirm their provenance, and come to a fuller understanding of the egregious extent of Clarke’s continuing mendacity.
Roadworks in Praia da Luz
There WERE of course road works in Praia da Luz. It would be remarkable if there had not been.
They were obviously the subject of diligent investigation by the PJ during their enquiries.
The foreman was interviewed and his statement is easily accessible in the PJ files, by using the search engine.
ANYONE can do this. (I have appended the full statement and link to save people the trouble.)
I have also prepared a composite map to show the three streets named.
The nearest point is slightly under 300 m. from Apartment 5A
Carlos Manuel Figueiredo Pereira
Occupation: Civil Engineer
He comes to the process as a witness, he works for the municipal chamber of Lagos since 1988 as a civil engineer.
With specific reference to the Urban and Environmental re-qualification works carried out in the town of Luz, namely in Rua Direita, the witness clarifies the following:
During 2006 a public tender was issued with the aim of adjudicating the firm offering the best conditions and guarantees.
This tender was won by the company Canana & Filhos Ltda and the date for starting work was established as April of the current year (2007).
During the first days/weeks of April in Rua Direita together with Largo da Republica, the different necessary infrastructures were created such as : networks for domestic drains, water supply, public lighting and telephones. These actions took place over the course of about 30 days, following others that had been implemented along Rua Helena Nascimiento Baptista.
With regard to the month of May, and after the first days of the month, work was begun at Rua Direita, aiming at the installation of water pipes, telephones and public lighting. The technical space excavated which guaranteed the application of three types of infrastructure previously mentioned, had the following average dimensions : 1,20 metres deep by 0,90 metres long, it being certain during the excavation work that they were almost immediately covered with sand and earth.
When asked how the daily checking was done, with regard to security measures and the quality of the work carried out, the witness said there was nothing abnormal to point out, it was a work that had been carried out calmly and without any incidents.
Why did not the Netflix editorial staff see what everyone else can ?
One of the few possible answers is –
That the Netflix production was part of the much larger campaign which exists for one purpose, and involves a great many people.
Everything they do, everything they say, write, tweet or post is done to one end –
To divert attention from the inconvenient fact that there is no evidence of Abduction
No evidence of a time Window
No evidence of Entry
No evidence of Presence
No evidence of Exit
And that after 12 years, or 4,400 days . . . of the police of 2 Nations, of various experts in their respective fields, of commentators, apologists, acolytes, ‘private detectives’ of varying morality and expertise, members of their many legal teams, and all the others . . .
not one has been able to suggest even a superficially plausible Abduction scenario.
Not one. Ever
To conclude – for the moment –
We may wonder how this makes Jon Clarke’s wife and children feel, knowing that their husband and father is a serial liar.
Knowing they cannot trust anything he says nor anything he writes
Knowing that he will stoop to lying about the disappearance and probable death of a little child.
We wonder how his friends feel, knowing that he is so easily caught out when he does lie.
We wonder how employees at “The Olive Press” feel knowing they have to sift anything he says
We wonder how his advertisers will feel, knowing they are associated with mendacity of this enormity, (and perhaps realising that they have to believe his circulation figures.)
I have no answers.
But someone does.
Taken from PeterMac's FREE e-book: 'What really happened to Madeleine McCann': http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.com/