Evidence of the direct involvement of MI5, MI6 and other branches of government security services in the Madeleine McCann case
Evidence of the direct involvement of MI5, MI6 and other branches of government security services in the Madeleine McCann case
This is an attempt to put together a short summary of what is known about the direct involvement of MI5, MI6 and other branches of government security services in the Madeleine McCann case. It is made following press reports this week about Goncalo Amaral’s recent references to the continuing involvement of MI5 in the Madeleine McCann case. It is not meant to be comprehensive, it is just at this stage a series of notes about the involvement of the British security services in the case. I hope others will add to them.
It does not cover other forms of government assistance to the McCanns which we know includes:
The heavy early involvement of the British ambassador and consul in Portugal
The appointment of Clarence Mitchell, then head of the government’s 40-strong Media Monitoring Unit, to manage the reputation of the McCanns and control publicity on the case from the first month right up until today
The involvement of CEOP in seeking photographs direct from the public and then, through Jim Gamble, actively assisting the McCann campaign on several occasions
Intervention with the Border Agency, allowing the McCanns to avoid going through customs control
The personal intervention of Gordon Brown in the case, first as Chancellor of the Exchequer and then as Prime Minister
Meetings by successive Home Secretaries with the McCanns
Directing the Metropolitan Police to set up Operation Grange.
MI5, MI6 and security services involvement in the Madeleine McCann case: A summary
1. Goncalo Amaral, in his book, ‘The Truth About A Lie’, refers to the active involvement of staff from MI5 in his investigation
2. In an article about the case as recently as 29 June 2014, Goncalo Amaral again spoke of MI5 involvement: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/485524/Madeleine-McCann-Disgraced-Portuguese-detective-MI5-spies-know-what-happened-to-Maddie
He said: “People will eventually learn what really happened when MI5 opens the case files. Don’t forget that the British secret services followed the case right from the beginning. I don’t know if that information will be made available, but if it’s like the United States, it takes years to have access to confidential information”.
3. In his book, ‘The Truth About A Lie’, Amaral makes these observations: “Two days later, English colleagues begin to arrive…Bob Small, an officer from the Leicestershire police, and one of his colleagues meet us to take stock of the situation…We insist on knowing what our English counterparts have come to Portugal to do…Then two more police officers arrive who are assigned to psychological support and communication with the family. Little by little, the number of English police officers grows exponentially. We place at their disposal a room next to our crisis unit, Task Portugal. These are specialists from various police services, including Scotland Yard. Special surveillance teams as well as information and telecommunications technicians turn up with their laptops and various high-tech equipment… Members of the British agency the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre [who had arrived in Portugal], take a close interest in Murat and work to develop his psychological profile…”
4. Amaral also states that Martin Grime, when he travelled back from taking his cadaver dogs Eddie and Keela to Portugal, was met by an MI5 officer who asked him questions (July 2007)
5. Control Risks Group (CRG), a risks and corporate security firm with very close links to the government, sent senior staff to Portugal to advise the McCanns and talk to the Portuguese Police on their behalf. Kate McCann refers to them in her book ‘madeleine’ as ‘primed to help’ (p. 125). CRG were also responsible for sending in another adviser to the McCanns, a man who, when the McCanns asked who he was, said ‘call me Hugh’ and declined to give his name. Kate McCann describes him as ‘a former intelligence officer, now a kidnap negotiator and counselor. ‘Hugh’ said that an ‘anonymous private donor’ was willing to fund the McCanns’ application to make Madeleine a Ward of Court
6. On 14 September 2007 there was a high-powered meeting at Kingsley Napley in London: present were the McCanns, Brian Kennedy, his lawyer and senior Freemason Edward Smethurt, Solicitor Angus McBride (who drove up to Rothley to collect the McCanns), top Solicitor Michael Caplan QC (an expert in extradition proccedings) and at least two members of staff of security company Control Risks Group
7. Gary Hgland, a private investigator chosen personally by Cheshire businessman to assist on the Madeleine McCann case, mentioned, in a chapter of his so-far-unpublished book, meeting with an old friend of his ‘on the Moroccan desk of MI6’ in connection with the McCann Team’s intention to mount a publicity drive in Morocco
8. A Special Branch officer met the McCanns at the airport on their hurried return from Portugal on 9 September and personally drove them to Rothley (‘madeleine’ by Dr Kate McCann, p. 259)
9. Henri Exton, one of the staff employed by Kevin Halligen and Oakley International, is known to have been the former Head of Covert Intelligence at MI5 – until he was dismissed from MI5 after a shoplifting offence. He was awarded the Queen’s Police Medal and the O.B.E. for extensive work in covert security matters for the Ministry of Defence. A blogger about the Madeleine case, known as ‘Blackwatch’, who had inside knowledge of the workings of the British security services, once wrote: “This is no middle grade security services player; he was - as is on the record - formerly the Head of MI5’s Covert Intelligence Section – and you don’t get much higher than that”.
10. Earlier this year, the Sunday Times published an article which said this about evidence compiled by Kevin Halligen, Henri Exton and Oakley International: “The evidence was in fact taken from an intelligence report produced for Gerry and Kate McCann by a firm of former spies in 2008. It contained crucial E-Fits of a man seen carrying a child on the night of Madeleine’s disappearance, which have only this month become public after he was identified as the prime suspect by Scotland Yard. A team of hand-picked former MI5 agents had been hired by the McCanns to chase a much-needed breakthrough in the search for their missing daughter Madeleine”.
11. Kevin Halligen, the disgraced criminal employed by the McCanns for 4 months at a cost of around £700,000, had extensive connections with the security services. For example, on 30 July 2004 Tim Craig-Harvey, Natasha Duval and Halligen set up Red Defence Ltd; all had connections with British government security services.
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t9951-evidence-of-the-direct-involvement-of-mi5-mi6-and-other-branches-of-government-security-services-in-the-madeleine-mccann-case#264789
Brenda Leyland remembered - two years after men from SKY News, owned by the world’s most powerful media mogul, Rupert Murdoch, hounded her to death
By Tony Bennett
Brenda Leyland remembered - two years
after men from SKY News, owned by the world’s most powerful media mogul,
Rupert Murdoch, hounded her to death
It was probably two years ago tonight (3 October)
that Brenda Leyland sadly ended her life. Lest we forget, here are a few
observations in respectful remembrance.
This was surely a case of a vulnerable woman, living
alone, abused and overpowered by the all-conquering mainstream media.
SKY News hounded her to her death, for had she not been mercilessly
exposed in regular broadcasts by SKY, every 15 minutes, for most of the
afternoon and evening of Wednesday, 1 October, of her being
door-stepped, she would surely still be with us.
But who else was responsible for triggering her
death? Quite a few people, as it turns out. There was someone – we don’t
yet know who – who decided to collate a dossier of nasty anti-McCann
tweeters. Then there were those who contributed to this dossier,
presumably by copying-and-pasting Facebook messages and tweets and the
like. Then someone else, again we don’t know who, was responsible for
handing over that dossier to the Metropolitan Police. By the way Bernard
Hogan-Howe, the Metroplitan Police Commissioner, put it on a radio
’phone-in, it may have been handled to him personally.
And what happened after that? Did that dossier
disclose any criminal offences? It appears that it did not. There were
no threats of any kind. Later, the Met quietly conceded that none of the
tweets - from anyone – amounted in law to a crime.
And so the next question we must ask is: How did SKY
News get to hear about this dossier? How did they know that Scotland
Yard were looking at it? Who told them?
On Tuesday 30 September, Martin Brunt door-stepped Brenda Leyland – took her completely by surprise.
Moreover, as we know from the video record, he said: “Are
you aware that your tweets are contained in a dossier that has been
passed to Scotland Yard?” The implication was very clear: You are being
investigated, not just by the local police, but by Scotland Yard, on
suspicion of committing a criminal offence. It would put real fear into
anyone. And was probably calculated to do so.
Later that afternoon, he had a further chat with
her. We don’t know what was said in that conversation. But we do have
Martin Brunt’s admission that she had already (after her lunch date with
a friend) been contemplating suicide.
One must assume that Brunt reported this to his
producers and editor. What possessed them to go ahead? Well, it would be
good telly for their viewers. It also may have been aired in the way it
was because very important public figures, like Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe
and Gerry McCann, were demanding action. It does look like several
powerful people collaborated behind the scenes to bring about this
public humiliation of Brenda Leyland.
And indeed the very next day (2 October) Gerry
McCann spoke to the media, and on 3 October – on the evening of which
Brenda Leyland probably took her life – we read this in the mainstream
press:
QUOTE
The father of Madeleine McCann has called for an example to be made of “vile” internet trolls who have been targeting the family.
Gerry McCann said he had grave concerns about letting his nine-year-old twins use the internet after receiving threats of violence and kidnapping.
The comments, in an interview with the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, came after it emerged that police were looking at a dossier of abuse posted on Twitter, Facebook and chat forums.
McCann, whose daughter Madeleine went missing in Praia da Luz in Portugal in 2007, said he and his wife Kate did not read such material because it was too upsetting.
He also blamed the press for inciting trolls, renewing his calls for the new industry-backed regulator IPSO to be scrapped and replaced by an official body established by royal charter.
The father of Madeleine McCann has called for an example to be made of “vile” internet trolls who have been targeting the family.
Gerry McCann said he had grave concerns about letting his nine-year-old twins use the internet after receiving threats of violence and kidnapping.
The comments, in an interview with the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, came after it emerged that police were looking at a dossier of abuse posted on Twitter, Facebook and chat forums.
McCann, whose daughter Madeleine went missing in Praia da Luz in Portugal in 2007, said he and his wife Kate did not read such material because it was too upsetting.
He also blamed the press for inciting trolls, renewing his calls for the new industry-backed regulator IPSO to be scrapped and replaced by an official body established by royal charter.
UNQUOTE
And so it was that – as far as we have been told -
Brenda Leyland bought some helium canisters, apparently off the internet
– and gassed herself to death.
Some think she might have been killed by the state, I
don’t personally think so. Surely no-one would be quite so wicked as to
do that?
All the same, the inquest into her death was a very
muted, short affair. A police officer said he’d been called to the
Marriott Hotel – less than a mile from Leicestershire Police
headquarters at Enderby – and found her dead, with helium canisters on
the floor and her laptop showing that she’d consulted ‘suicide sites’.
One might think that the Coroner, under such
circumstances, would have questioned the SKY News team intently and said
something about that in her summing-up. But no, nothing at all. One of
Europes’s most powerful media organisations had been allowed to (a)
doorstep her – when she had not committed any crime, (b) show an
interview of her repeatedly – may be up to over 30 times, and (c)
proceed with doing so only after Brenda has said she was feeling
suicidal.
That was cruelty. It was oppression. It was the exercise of naked power over a depressed, suicidal, single woman.
The media, who rarely criticise each other, barely
reported her death or the inquest. OFCOM, the TV media watchdog, did
nothing. No MP spoke up in the House of Commons about the conduct of SKY
News.
This is how the Guardian – correctly – headlined their report on the inquest:
Woman killed herself after being doorstepped over McCann trolling
Sky News offers condolences to family of Brenda
Leyland, who was found dead in a Leicester hotel two days after channel
broadcast footage of her
Martin Brunt is important enough to have his own Wikipedia entry. It records this:
"In October 2014, Brunt was the journalist
involved in revealing the identity of Brenda Leyland, who had posted
comments concerning the McCann investigation on social media. Following the revelation and a report to Leicestershire Police,
Brunt and a camera crew confronted Leyland at her home. Following the
confrontation Leyland was later found dead in a hotel, leading to calls
on social media for Brunt to be sacked".
We might note in passing that Brunt had two very
strange conversations, recorded by the Portuguese Police, with Robert
Murat. In one of them, he offered Murat legal help from SKY News's legal
department .That was curious conduct to say the very least. Later, he
said on SKY News that DNA samples of body fluids from the McCanns'
holiday apartment in Praia da Luz were a '100% match' with Madeleine's
DNA.
A couple of media journalists were brave enough at
least to begin questioning what had taken place in the lead-up to
Brenda's suicide.
An article by Claire Hardaker in the Guardian said this:
Was Brenda Leyland really a troll?
Accused of trolling the McCanns, Leyland didn’t conform to our stereotyped idea of a troll – but those stereotypes quickly fail.
[PIC[ ‘The McCanns have faced a barrage of online
abuse, including threats of violence, murder and abduction of their
other children.’ Photograph: Lefteris Pitarakis/AP
One of those individuals was Brenda Leyland.
A well-spoken, middle-class, 63-year-old mother of two, who lived in a
picturesque village. Leyland regularly took to Twitter to draw attention
to what she felt was an appalling miscarriage of justice. Last week,
she found herself revealed to the nation by a television news team who
exposed her as a “troll”. But was she really a troll?
The first problem is the use of the word. It has
become a by-word for everything from minor disagreements through to
annoying incivility through to criminal behaviour such as death threats.
When we think of trolls, the stereotype is of angry, unemployed,
disenfranchised young men who exist in a miserable, hermit-like darkness
that is void of compassion or loving relationships – young men like John Nimmo, for instance, who was jailed for sending abusive messages to feminist campaigner Caroline Criado-Perez.
We assume stupidity, alcohol abuse, and social
issues. We like to think that they must be so obviously damaged that we
would spot them in the street. However, when we look at cases that have resulted in convictions, the stereotype quickly fails: Peter Nunn was a 33-year-old father; Isabella Sorley was a 23-year-old university graduate; Frank Zimmerman was 60.
Even if we could create a troll stereotype from
these cases, about the only common theme is that those who get caught
are likely to be less than savvy about keeping themselves unfindable
online.
Alternatively, they may be so impassioned about a
“cause” that they cannot see how their behaviour has escalated out of
control. Both convictions and the data show that stereotypes mislead us
dangerously because they encourage us to focus only on those who fit the
bill, when in reality, the genteel elderly man who moved to let you sit
next to him on the train could be sending vile rape threats to his
employer via his smartphone. Those who troll can be any age, any gender,
anyone at all, and so it begins to look as though the label would fit
Leyland too.
The second problem is that the word “troll” has
become shorthand for describing any behaviour online that may cause
offence. It conjures up strong feelings of repulsion and disgust, and
doubtless some watching a bewildered Leyland trying to escape the TV
news team last week will have felt a grim satisfaction, and thought to
themselves: “She shouldn’t dish out what she can’t take.”
But what was she actually dishing out? Looking
over the 5,000-plus tweets from her @ sweepyface account, there is
clearly a fixation – even an unsettling obsession - with the McCanns.
She describes them as neglectful parents, objects to their ongoing media
appearances, and complains that they are profiting from their
daughter’s disappearance. And when people challenge her, she calls them
unpleasant names, disputes their evidence and blocks them. In short, her
conduct would aggravate some and deeply offend others – but much the
same could be said of select comedians, journalists and celebrities who
can reach millions. Leyland’s account had a mere 182 followers by the
time it suddenly vanished. The crucial question is: did she incite
others to harm the McCanns? Or threaten to abduct the McCanns’ other
children? Or pose any clear menace?
On Twitter at least it doesn’t seem so.
She regularly tweeted the Metropolitan police and Crimewatch, demanding
they do more. She would highlight what she felt were untruths in the
stories of major press outlets such as the Daily Mail. She railed at
media outlets such as LBC for not airing what she felt was the other
side of the story. And at the same time, she ensconced herself within a small network of other Twitter
users who supported her, agreed with her, and perhaps gave her a sense
of identity and importance as a figurehead campaigning for what she
believed was justice for Madeleine.
Ultimately, individuals who troll or become
obsessed with conspiracy theories can be driven by many factors –
boredom, loneliness, a need for validation – and we cannot discount the
possibility of mental health problems. At times, their behaviour may
border on loathsome, but a news team with a high-profile journalist at the helm is not the way to bring about justice.
I will finish with a reminder of an assortment of Brenda’s final tweets:
516694464455528448|Mon Sep 29 21:02:14 +0000
2014|#mccann Just noticed @ skymartinbrunt is following me, why Martin
won't you investigate some of these facts and show neutrality?
516686111918530561|Mon Sep 29 20:29:03 +0000
2014|#mccann Block function is used against Shills, however this
Tierney business has huge relevance to the investigation
516612962053013504|Mon Sep 29 15:38:23 +0000 2014|@
anotherviv @ xklamation #mccann I agree, all we are bound together in,
is to find justice for Madeleine, not to mud sling
516663733024985088|Mon Sep 29 19:00:07 +0000
2014|#mccann "Men in suits want me to stop " but not until I have told
every body about their presence
516510225466392576|Mon Sep 29 08:50:08 +0000
2014|#mccann I recall the glee with which they outed poor guy they
thought was me, imagine how shocked he must have been
500166020162945024|Fri Aug 15 06:24:06 +0000
2014|#mccann We see Isabelle & Richard Hall, prepared to use real
names, not once will any Shill dare to go public
516680065917403136|Mon Sep 29 20:05:01 +0000
2014|Amy Tierney 1) Has more of a relationship with #mccann s than
witness should, appears 2 have been rewarded for testimony, tweets @
work
516355932910288897|Sun Sep 28 22:37:02 +0000 2014|@
veniviedivici @ BigPhiIIyStyle @ basilandmanuel #mccann No doubt about
it in my mind Winters and Goose [Summers & Swan] are up to necks in
this
516344768306368512|Sun Sep 28 21:52:40 +0000
2014|@PORTUGALONLINE #mccann Coincidence that a fat temp nannying
suddenly lands a top job after dealings with Gerry ? NO NO NO.
516340933018013696|Sun Sep 28 21:37:26 +0000 2014|@
PORTUGALONLINE @ siamesey @ RothleyPillow #mccann So she goes from
nobody nanny to Govt worker, so she has been hushed up, stinks
515948487226445824|Sat Sep 27 19:37:59 +0000 2014|@
Nigel_Farage @ MarkReckless Well done Mark, a brave move and the right
one [joiing UKIP]. The existing 2 major parties are a spent force.
515400503640227841|Fri Sep 26 07:20:30 +0000 2014|@
TeddyShepherd @ ThomasBadenRies #mccann A clumsy attempt by them at a
"sting operation" edited to show "haters" as Bigots and worse
What if it turns out that Brenda Leyland was right to question the McCanns?
Posted on the CMOMM forum: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13178-brenda-leyland-remembered-two-years-after-men-from-sky-news-owned-by-the-worlds-most-powerful-media-mogul-rupert-murdoch-hounded-her-to-death#350498
Letter sent today to the Prime Minister and Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe suggesting Met Police enquiry into Maddie McCann mystery is not genuine
I have today sent off my letters to the Prime Minister and the Metropolitan Police Commissioner.
I set up my forum (CMOMM) with serious intent. I wanted my forum to put together evidence about what really happened to Madeleine. Over the years, together, we have done just that.
When Operation Grange was set up in May 2011, many of us had high hopes for it. I think it’s fair to say that most of us now feel that those hopes have been dashed.
I’d like to thank first of all those who helped me compile this letter, and all of you who in recent weeks have made suggestions about the content, even those who noticed a minor typo or a failure to close some inverted commas. I hope I’ve done justice to all your suggestions. I’m especially pleased to be able to say that my letter has been examined by some of those who have put the most work into unravelling this mystery and they have pronounced it accurate in its details and very much to the point. And that point is that Operation Grange does not seem to have been a genuine search for the truth.
I also want to pay tribute to many others whose work has contributed to this letter. By that I mean people like Nigel Moore and ‘pamalam’ who have for nearly 10 years run the mccannfiles and mccannpjfiles sites. I also mean Joana Morais and the many Portuguese helpers who voluntarily translated the Portuguese police files on the case, and many other documents. And I also mean every single individual anywhere who has helped to get us nearer to the truth.
What to do now?
I’ve done my bit. Now can you all help me please?
Can you please contact your local M.P., enclosing a copy of my letter, and add something like: “Dear MP, Please have a look at the enclosed letter and Appendix. It suggests that the Metropolitan Police have not been conducting a genuine enquiry into what happened to Madeleine McCann. Please forward this letter to the Prime Minister, Home Secretary and Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe and ask them for a detailed response to the serious allegations in the letter. Thank you. Yours sincerely…”
There is information and advice about how to contact your M.P. on the ‘Write To Them’ site: https://www.writetothem.com/
Please use social media to promote this letter. If using Twitter, please use hashtags. I suggest something like:
#CMOMM letter to #PrimeMinister suggesting #MetPolice enquiry into Maddie #McCann mystery is not genuine
Add a link to this thread, of course!
I’ll be arranging to send copies of this to various people over the next few weeks. Please share what you’ve done, or post further suggestions, on this thread.
And thank you all again
Jill
Letter and Appendix can be read/shared/copied from the CMOMM forum: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13163-letter-sent-today-to-the-prime-minister-and-sir-bernard-hogan-howe-suggesting-met-police-enquiry-into-maddie-mccann-mystery-is-not-genuine#350091
---------------------------------
Update: First reply is from the Home Office
Letter to Prime Minister and Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe on behalf of Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann forum
From: Ms Jill Havern and members of ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’ forum
Mrs Theresa May
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
LONDON
W1A 1AA
Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe
Metropolitan Police
New Scotland Yard,
8-10 Broadway,
LONDON
SW1H 0BG
Monday, 26 September 2016
Dear Prime Minister and Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe
The conduct of the Operation Grange investigation into the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann
First of all, Prime Minister, we congratulate you on your appointment as Prime Minister and wish you every success in your new position. The serious matters raised in this letter will of course be very familiar to you, as you had meetings with the McCanns and their advisers when you were Home Secretary, and asked Sir Paul Stephenson to set up Operation Grange. You may also be aware of three petitions that were placed on the Prime Minister’s website by members of my forum, in 2010, 2014 and one in 2015, which addressed issues about the investigations into Madeleine McCann’s reported disappearance. The first two called for a public enquiry into the investigations. The most recent called on the Home Office to publish a full report on the work of Operation Grange.
According to statements made in the press on 3 April this year, you – as the then Home Secretary – sanctioned further expenditure on Operation Grange of £95,000, which was said to be for a further six months to ‘conclude’ this review and investigation. That meant that Operation Grange was scheduled to be completed on 3 October, in a week’s time. Since then we have learnt that the funding is to be extended by a further six months, with the team being granted a further £100,000.
The forum: ‘Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann
I write in my capacity as the owner of the internet forum, ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’, set up in November 2009. The letter is sent on behalf of my admin team, our members and our regular guests and visitors, who number tens of thousands every day. We currently have over 6,350 members, many of whom read us every day for updates, and hundreds of whom contribute by way of research, comment, and analysis every month.
Long-term forum members include many with professional backgrounds, including the police, the law and the medical professions, and others with technical skills in such fields as forensics, photography and statement analysis.
The forum is far and away the best-read Madeleine McCann discussion forum on the internet, and has been referred to regularly in the press and in books such as ‘Looking for Madeleine’, by Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan.
It is with this background that we urge you to consider most carefully the following issues relating to Operation Grange.
The remit of Operation Grange
The very first consideration must be the remit allocated to Operation Grange from the outset. The relevant parts of it read as follows:
“The activity, in the first instance, will be that of an ‘investigative review’. This will entail a review of the whole of the investigation(s) which have been conducted in to the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance. The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);
The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies,
UK Law Enforcement agencies,
Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations.
“The investigative review is intended to collate, record and analyse what has gone before. It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter…
“The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness…”.
It was clear from the outset that the initial investigative review had a strictly limited remit. That is highly unusual for any review which purports to be a genuine, comprehensive review. Most ‘cold case’ reviews start with a ‘clean sheet’, so to speak.
Crucially, however, the review insisted that it would only investigate ‘the abduction’. That meant that, from the very first, Operation Grange had ruled out any consideration of whether or not the McCanns could have been directly involved in the disappearance of Madeleine.
The purpose of this letter is not to make any accusation against the McCanns. It is simply to point out that, despite a number of indications that they may have been involved, the Operation Grange team were told from the start not to investigate them.
During his investigative review, the Investigating Officer, Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood stated that “Primarily, what we sought to do from the beginning, is trying to draw everything back to, to zero, if you like ..”. Plainly this was not the case, as any potential involvement of the McCanns was ruled out from the beginning.
In addition, on the day that your predecessor David Cameron signalled that he had ordered the Home Office to set up a review, his spokesman declared that the purpose of the review was to ‘help the family’. It was plain, then, that the officers leading the Operation Grange team were simply not allowed to consider any involvement of the McCanns in Madeleine’s disappearance.
The interim report of the Portuguese Police, 10 Septenber 2007
I will not in this letter set out the many indications that the McCanns may have been directly involved in the disappearance of their daughter. That is something that any genuine re-investigation, with a remit not limited to declaring in advance that Madeleine had been abducted, should examine. I will however refer to the interim report of the Portuguese Police, dated 10 September 2007, a document made public in July 2008. It was compiled by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida. In a lengthy document, the contents of which have never been convincingly refuted, he set out the following indications that the McCanns may have been involved. These are all direct quotations from a translation of his report:
1 No abduction “As time went by, the abduction scenario was not confirmed. The abduction hypothesis did not stand up”.
2 The McCanns worked on their version of events “The information that was initially collected from family and friends was uncertain. In addition, the McCanns and their friends worked on their account of events in order to strengthen and defend their version of what had happened Madeleine”
3 ‘Distorted’ information “The information from the immediate family and their group of friends which is fundamental in investigating this type of crime was always distorted…The group’s initial informal statements given during the initial stages of the investigation immediately introduced the abduction hypothesis. But even simple things were the subject of misinformation:
was the window open or closed?
was the shutter up or down?
was the balcony door open or closed?
was the front door merely shut or locked with a key?
4 Changes of story “The media attention that has been given to the case and the search for information by the said media has led to an evolution in Madeleine’s parents’ statements. All the information that has been made public has contributed to the McCanns rebuilding and adapting their story to fit the eventual police questions”.
5 Excuses for corpse scent and blood “When the media first informed the public that blood had been detected ‘in the car and in the apartment’, Dr Kate McCann and members of her family made statements to the public with the simple excuse that it had been someone who had access to the apartment that had deliberately placed this evidence there. Now they even say that it was the criminal investigation team that placed this ‘false’ evidence (i.e. blood and cadaver odour in the apartment and in the car). In an attempt to justify the finding of [Madeleine’s] blood in the apartment, Dr Kate McCann went even further, stating on that occasion that Madeleine sometimes suffered nosebleeds”.
6 Altering the crime scene “There is strong evidence that the crime scene was altered, and some furniture was moved around: an intentional alteration of things in that apartment took place, in order to create a false scenario that doesn’t match reality, in an attempt to develop opportunities to create a bogus abduction scenario. Those changes are indications that the abduction was a stage-managed simulation.
7 Findings of a top sniffer dog handler In addition, Tavares de Almeide listed the findings of top British dog handler, Martin Grime, who now works for the F.B.I. in the U.S. In early August 2007, he took with him to Portugal two springer spaniels, Eddie, a ‘cadaver dog’ who was trained to alert to the past presence of a corpse, and Keela, a ‘blood dog’ trained to detect blood. According to Mr Grime, the two dogs between them alerted on 17 occasions either to the scent of the past presence of a corpse or to blood in locations connected to the McCanns: their apartment, their clothes and in their hired car. They alerted to no other items or locations in Praia da Luz.
8 The unreliable evidence of Jane Tanner “Continuing with our analysis of information offered to us, one of the group’s members, Jane Tanner…became an important witness…She said she saw someone crossing the street at dinner time from the location of the McCanns’ apartment towards Robert Murat’s house…This information directed and occupied our work for a long time. This may be an example of how information that is not correct may not only delay the investigation but could even have led to losing the little girl. Jane Tanner insisted on the truthfulness of her account. This led to certain scenarios being developed. But these scenarios were not sustained in reality...”
9 “The precise moment when Jane Tanner chose to make her statement about what she had ‘seen’ and the explanation for choosing that moment, is unreal. That is to say: it is not easy to accept that any witness (from the group), on seeing someone with a child in their arms walking away from the McCanns’ apartment, didn’t act and speak immediately. Then there is her description of the abductor being altered, or ‘perfected’. These reasons mean there is little credibility in what she says”
10 “There was a discrepancy [about the moment Jane Tanner allegedly saw an abductor] between the statements of Dr Gerald McCann and Jane Tanner. They claimed to have passed each other at only two or three metres’ distance [7 to 10 feet], yet failed to see each other. How could they position themselves as both being together in quite a confined space, yet both fail to see each other walking by; or, more correctly, one sees the other but the other doesn’t see her? Even the exact location where they supposedly crossed each other’s paths is not very well defined by both”.
The following are direct quotations from Tavares de Almeida’s report, on the subject of the alerts by Martin Grime’s cadaver dogs:
“Apartment 5A, Ocean Club resort, the McCanns’ apartment from where the child disappeared: The cadaver dog alerted to the scent of a corpse in the master bedroom, in a corner, by the wardrobe; in living room, behind the sofa, and by the side window, while the bloodhound alerted to blood in the living room behind the sofa, and by the side window (in exactly the same spot that had been signalled by the cadaver dog)”.
“Front garden of Apartment 5A: The cadaver dog alerted to the scent of a corpse on one of the flower beds (the dog handler however commented on the ‘lightness’ of the odour in this location)”.
“The McCann family’s clothes and belongings: The cadaver dog alerted to the scent of a corpse on two pieces of clothing belonging to Dr Kate McCann, one piece of clothing belonging to Madeleine (a red T-shirt) and on Madeleine’s soft toy [Cuddle Cat]. The cadaver odour was detected when the toy was still inside the McCanns’ residence in July 2007; the scent was later confirmed outside the house as well”.
“The vehicle that was used by the McCann family: The cadaver dog alerted to the scent of a corpse on the car key and on the inside of the car boot, while the bloodhound also marked the car key and the inside of the car boot”.
“In a total of 10 cars examined [in an underground car park) the cadaver dog and the blood dog marked only the car of the McCann family, first rented on 27 May”.
Tavares de Almeida concluded his report as follows:
“From everything that was established, the facts point in the direction of the death of Madeleine McCann occurring on the night of 3 May 2007, inside apartment 5A, at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, which was occupied by the McCann couple and by their three children. There is a coincidence between the markings of cadaver odour and blood [by the two dogs], according to the (partial) Laboratory Report that has been annexed to the files.
“The said marking occurred behind the living room sofa (cadaver odour/blood/DNA), which unarguably proves that said piece of furniture was pushed back by someone, after the death of Madeleine McCann was confirmed. Because of the few traces that were recovered on location and subject to examination, it has to be admitted as a strong hypothesis that it [the room] was subject to a clean-up operation at some time following the occurrence of death”.
“From everything that we have discovered, our files result in the following conclusions:
A the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007
B a simulation - a staged hoax - of an abduction took place
C in order to render the child’s death impossible before 10.00pm, a situation of checking of the McCann couple’s children while they slept was concocted
D Dr Gerald McCann and Dr Kate McCann are involved in the concealment of the corpse of their daughter, Madeleine McCann
E at this moment, there seems to be no strong indications that the child’s death was other than the result of a tragic accident…
F from what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, did not want to deliver up Madeleine’s corpse immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility therefore that it was moved from the initial place where she died. This situation may raise questions concerning the circumstances in which the death of the child took place.
I should at this point add the explanations that the McCanns have given for the alerts of the two dogs.
Dr Gerry McCann is on record as stating, to as Portuguese interviewer: “I can tell you that we have also looked at evidence about cadaver dogs and they are incredibly unreliable”. This statement contradicts the evidence from many disciplines, not only searching for corpse scent and blood, but also explosives, drugs (even being able to distinguish between different types of explosive material and different drugs) and even medical conditions. Sniffer dogs are used increasingly and to strikingly good effect in many fields in countries all over the world.
By contrast, the settled view of Dr Kate McCann, as set out on page of her book ‘madeleine’, is that the dogs made ‘false’ alerts because of ‘the conscious or unconscious signals of the handler”. This amounts to an attack on the professional integrity and judgment of Mr Grime and implies that the dogs were ‘mistaken’ in all of their 17 alerts to corpse scent and blood.
In addition, In the days immediately following leaks about the dogs’ findings, the McCanns and members of their family came up with a series of bizarre and increasingly desperate explanations for them. These included that any blood was from Madeleine having nosebleeds, or having scratched herself when climbing the steps to the aircraft, or from mosquitoes flying into the walls, or that any cadaver odour was due to carrying dirty nappies or rotting meat in their hired car, or to Kate McCann’s clothes and the soft toy, Cuddle cat, having been contaminated by her having visited six people who had died in the fortnight before they left for their holiday.
There is no evidence that Operation Grange has addressed these issues, though it has been supplied to them with full references.
New research: A photograph, evidence of collusion, and other matters
During the nine years since Madeleine was reported missing, members of my forum, and many others elsewhere, have added to the concerns about the possible involvement of the McCanns in Madeleine’s disappearance. It would be impossible in a short letter to even list all these concerns. They are all available for the police to see on my forum and on many other places on the internet.
I will however mention just two significant matters.
The photographic evidence of Madeleine’s presence in Praia da Luz on the McCanns’ holiday is confined to just five photographs. Three of those five are genuine photographs taken on the first day of their holiday, Saturday 28 April. A fourth, allegedly showing Madeleine holding tennis balls on a tennis court in Praia da Luz, has been claimed to have been taken by two different people and on two different days. There are other aspects of that photograph that also cast doubt as to its true provenance. A fifth photograph, of Gerry McCann sitting by a pool with his daughters Madeleine and Amelia, is claimed by the McCanns to have been taken at 2.29pm on the day Madeleine was reported missing. They have called it ‘The Last Photo’.
However, evidence discussed on my forum suggests that this key photograph may have been taken earlier in the week, probably on the Sunday. There is no indication that Operation Grange has addressed this evidence.
Second, there is the strange and striking correlation of two reports, made respectively by Jane Tanner and Martin Smith, alleging they had seen a man carrying a young child on the night of 3 May 2007, with a third report by a Spanish ex-pat living in Germany Nuno Lourenco, in which he alleged that a Portuguese holidaymaker, Wojchiech Krokowski, had tried to kidnap his own daughter on Sunday 29 April. Nuno Lourenco’s statement can be shown to be demonstrably false, yet his description of Krokowski is matched in almost every detail by the descriptions of Jane Tanner and Martin Smith. In particular, each of the three uses this meaningless phrase to describe the man: “He didn’t look like a tourist”. These facts, prima facie, suggest collusion to promote Krokowski as the likely abductor. This alleged collusion is clearly a matter which should have been addressed by Operation Grange, but there is no evidence that it has been.
These issues have been further complicated by the former Investigation Officer of Operation Grange, Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, having claimed to a 7 million audience on BBC Crimewatch on 14 October 2103 that the person seen by Jane Tanner had ‘come forward’, six years later. We were told that he had been carrying his young child home from the night creche, with no mention made of where the child’s mother was. He was said to have been carrying his child in exactly the same way as described by Jane Tanner, with no buggy, no blanket and only dressed in pyjamas. It was dark and cold (13 deg C) at the time. The identity of this person who had suddenly emerged after six years was not disclosed. In addition, if he had been taking the route from the creche described by DCI Redwood, he could not have been taking the shortest route to his apartment. For these reasons and others, many people have real cause to doubt whether DCI Redwood was being truthful.
Members of my forum and others have on many occasions submitted detailed evidence to Operation Grange on these and other issues, but there is no evidence that these lines of enquiry have been followed up.
The appointment of Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell as the Senior Investigating Officer for Operation Grange
There is one other issue about the remit that has caused widespread concern, and that is why former Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell was chosen to head Operation Grange and allowed to set the remit. The action for which Hamish Campbell is best known is having been the Investigating Officer into the as-yet-unsolved murder of Jill Dando. His work on the case resulted in an innocent man, Barry George/Bulsara, being wrongly jailed for eight years. There were credible suggestions, though never proved, that the conviction of Barry George was secured by a member of the Metropolitan Police placing an amount of firearms residue, matching the known weapon used to kill Jill Dando, in his coat pocket. Hamish Campbell’s role in that utterly botched police investigation surely made him an unsuitable choice to head up one of the most controversial and expensive reviews and investigations undertaken by the Metropolitan Police.
The employment by the McCanns of wholly inappropriate private detection agencies and individuals
I turn now to this aspect of Operation Grange’s remit:
“The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);
The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies,
UK Law Enforcement agencies,
Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations”.
I and my fellow members seriously question the designation of ‘other private investigation agencies/staff’ as ‘stakeholders’. Clearly, what is mainly being referred to here is the McCanns’ own private investigations. DCI Redwood made it clear on a number of occasions that he regarded the McCanns’ own investigations as being of real merit and interest. Pictures were seen in the British press of his men collecting boxes of documentary material from the offices, in Barcelona, of Metodo 3, one of the detective agencies used by the McCanns. Two e-fits of a man carrying a child said to have been seen by Mr Martin Smith and his family were drawn up by Henri Exton, one of the investigators employed by the McCanns, in the spring of 2008. These e-fits lay gathering dust until suddenly, on 14 October 2013, DCI Redwood produced them, saying that they were now “the centre of Operation Grange’s focus”. These two examples demonstrate without question that Operation Grange have relied to a considerable extent on the material supplied by the various ‘other private investigation agencies/staff’.
However, we would seriously question whether they were right to do so, based on all that is now known about the agencies and people involved in the McCanns’ private investigations, for which, as we know, they received very generous donations, amounting to millions of pounds, from a generous British public.
In an Appendix, I have provided a list of the main agencies and individuals that the McCanns have employed as part of their private investigations, and what is known about each. In summary, the two main private investigation agencies employed by the McCanns, namely Metodo 3 and Oakley International, were run by crooks. None of the individuals or agencies used seem to have had any experience whatsoever of finding missing children or adults. All have very dubious backgrounds and histories. I suggest that the Metropolitan Police must have known this from the beginning, since at least some of the facts I set out in the Appendix have been published in Britain’s mainstream media, and in places on the internet (including my own). How, therefore, in the light of the extraordinary conduct of these agencies and individuals, could the Metropolitan Police possibly claim that such material could assist in their investigations?
Given the appalling track record of these agencies and individuals, may I respectfully suggest that much more light will be shed on what really happened to Madeleine McCann if you begin with a fresh police force and a fresh remit. Any new police force should then interview under caution any U.K. individuals who have worked for the McCanns (see the Appendix for a list of names). It would also be useful for any new police force to interview former Metodo 3 employee, Julian Peribanez, who worked on the Madeleine McCann case. Two years ago, he published a book which contained a damning indictment of the corruption and criminality within Metodo 3. His claims amount to an accusation that Metodo 3 was, in effect, never employed to search for Madeleine at all. This matches an account written by Christie Twomey for The Times in early 2008, in which she also made strong criticisms of Metodo 3 and two if its staff.
The major involvement of the government and the security services in supporting the McCanns
As Prime Minister and the nation’s Home Secretary from May 2010 to July 2016, you will know better than almost anyone else about the extensive involvement of the government and the security services ever since Madeleine McCann was reported missing. This has seemed to a great many people to have been wholly disproportionate. Moreover, it has not led to Madeleine being found nor to the arrest of anyone responsible for her disappearance. I can only summarise here some of this high-level government support:
1 Appointing, within days of Madeleine’s reported disappearance, the Head of the government’s Media Monitoring Unit, Clarence Mitchell, to be the McCanns’ public relations spokesman, a post he held for nine years
2 The reported, successful efforts of former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown to persuade the Portuguese police to release the description of a possible abductor, based on the claims of the McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner
3 The direct involvement of MI5, as disclosed by Portuguese investigation co-ordinator Goncalo Amaral, in his book ‘The Truth of the Lie’
4 The role of the British Ambassador in Portugal, interfering with the Portuguese police who were trying to seize items for forensic testing from the McCanns in the early days
5 Delays by the then Home Secretary in 2007 and 2008 in processing requests by the Portuguese authorities for rogatory interviews
6 The reported involvement of Special Branch officers, who met with the McCanns at East Midlands Airport and drove them to their home the day they returned from Portugal
7 Setting up a top secret national co-ordinating committee on the Madeleine McCann case on 8 May 2007, under the chairmanship of the Head of Leicestershire Constabulary, Matt Baggott
8 Leicestershire Police officers deliberately delaying sending relevant evidence to the Portuguese Police, advising Jane Tanner ahead of an identity parade in which she purported to identify Robert Murat as the person she had seen carrying a child the night Madeleine was reported missing (leading to his arrest)
9 British criminal profilers identifying Robert Murat as fitting the likely profile of the abductor to the extent of 90% of likely characteristics
10 The former Prime Minister acceding to a request made by his friend Rebekah Brooks, CEO of Rupert Murdoch’s News International empire, to set up Operation Grange, reportedly after threatening him with ‘a week of bad headlines about Theresa May.
These are only examples of the government’s heavy involvement in this case.
The McCanns’ public appeal for funds
There are several issues regarding the McCanns’ fund-raising efforts which do not appear to have been addressed by Operation Grange at all. Some of these are set out in lengthy papers written by qualified accountant, Enid O’Dowd, and can be read on the internet.
One issue is that the McCanns’ ‘Find Madeleine Fund’ is a private trust and company and not a charity. Moreover, it is quite clearly controlled by the McCanns and close members of their family and friends, although to the public it appears to be a charity.
Several contradictory statements have been made by the McCanns and those backing them about the use to which the funds have been put. Statements were made that funds would ‘only be used for the search’. However, contrary statements have been made suggesting that significant monies from the fund have been used to pay the McCanns’ legal fees and costs.
Apart from that, why has the public’s money apparently been squandered on the ill-chosen agencies and individuals employed by the McCanns, a responsibility also shared of course with each one of the Directors of the Fund? How could it be, for example, that the McCanns paid Kevin Halligen, said in newspaper articles to be a serial fraudster, £500,000 plus expenses for four months’ work, during which he was for most of the time living a 5-star life of luxury in hotels in Britain and the U.S, with his girlfriend, Shirin Trachiotis? Does the public not need Operation Grange, or others, to provide answers to these questions?
More recently, on 2 September 2015, the McCanns’ spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, said:: “They [the McCanns] realise that [Operation Grange] cannot go on forever. A newspaper report informed the public that Mitchell had explained “how former GP Kate and heart doctor Gerry, both 37, of Rothley, Leics., had moved money from the publicly-backed Find-Madeleine-Fund into a special account in anticipation of having to finance the hunt for their daughter themselves". The public, when they gave money to the Find Madeleine Fund, would not expect the Directors to then create a separate fund, which was reported as being controlled just by the McCanns.
What should happen now
I have set out the case that Operation Grange has not succeeded in its search for the truth because of its inappropriately limited remit. I have also referred to justified criticisms about the operation of the Find Madeleine Fund.
Despite impressive statistics released from time to time of the numbers of documents studied, lines of enquiry pursued, rogatory requests submitted, numbers of suspects or persons of interest questioned, etc., it seems plain that after well over six years, Operation Grange is nowhere nearer to solving this case.
You will be aware that thousands of people, among them professionals such as police officers, criminal profilers, criminologists, doctors, psychiatrists and statement analysts, have questioned the McCanns’ account of events.
At the same time, we have seen in the press over recent years many accounts of senior-level police corruption in the Metropolitan Police force.
An analysis of the case by 'PeterMac', a retired Police Superintendent, and other evidence submitted by members of my forum
'PeterMac', a retired Police Superintendent, has studied the Madeleine McCann case for nine years, and conducted original research on key evidential issues in the case. I am aware that he has submitted a great deal of evidence to the respective Senior Investigating Officers, always obtaining a receipt for the information he has sent them. His analysis, which by implication is highly critical of Operation Grange, has been presented in a free e-book which can now be read at this link:
http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/
Other members of my forum have also submitted evidence and have been assured verbally and in writing that all the evidence they have submitted is being kept on computer and has been taken into consideration. It will therefore be available for any fresh police force, not bound by a restricted remit, to investigate.
On behalf of the members of my forum, therefore, I call on you to:
1 Appoint independent assessors of proven integrity and independence to evaluate the work of Operation Grange, and make its findings public. In this respect, may I remind you of this part of the review’s remit, as determined by DCS Hamish Campbell: “The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness…” Any such report must include a full investigation into the huge involvement in this case of MI5, Special Branch and other government or government-backed security agencies;
2 Appoint, via the new Home Secretary, a different police force, which has the highest possible reputation for integrity and independence, to investigate the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann;
3 Ensure that any new police investigation has an unlimited remit and can therefore go to wherever the evidence leads them;
4 Order the relevant government department to investigate all aspects of the operation of the Find Madeleine Fund, including:
A investigating the actions of all of its Directors,
B the funding of the private investigations,
C whether or not funds have been used to pay the McCanns’ legal fees and expenses,
D why it was necessary for a separate account to be set up last year, to be controlled by the McCanns and not the Directors, and
E accounting for all monies paid into and from the Find Madeleine Fund since it was set up in May 2007.
I shall send the same letter to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe but I urge you to seek an urgent meeting with him to discuss the contents of my letter. Please give this matter your most careful consideration and I shall look forward to your response in the near future.
Yours sincerely
_______________________
Jill Havern
For and on behalf of the members of ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’
The Appendix can be read on the forum: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13153-draft-letter-to-prime-minister-re-operation-grange-comments-please
Mrs Theresa May
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
LONDON
W1A 1AA
Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe
Metropolitan Police
New Scotland Yard,
8-10 Broadway,
LONDON
SW1H 0BG
Monday, 26 September 2016
Dear Prime Minister and Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe
The conduct of the Operation Grange investigation into the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann
First of all, Prime Minister, we congratulate you on your appointment as Prime Minister and wish you every success in your new position. The serious matters raised in this letter will of course be very familiar to you, as you had meetings with the McCanns and their advisers when you were Home Secretary, and asked Sir Paul Stephenson to set up Operation Grange. You may also be aware of three petitions that were placed on the Prime Minister’s website by members of my forum, in 2010, 2014 and one in 2015, which addressed issues about the investigations into Madeleine McCann’s reported disappearance. The first two called for a public enquiry into the investigations. The most recent called on the Home Office to publish a full report on the work of Operation Grange.
According to statements made in the press on 3 April this year, you – as the then Home Secretary – sanctioned further expenditure on Operation Grange of £95,000, which was said to be for a further six months to ‘conclude’ this review and investigation. That meant that Operation Grange was scheduled to be completed on 3 October, in a week’s time. Since then we have learnt that the funding is to be extended by a further six months, with the team being granted a further £100,000.
The forum: ‘Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann
I write in my capacity as the owner of the internet forum, ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’, set up in November 2009. The letter is sent on behalf of my admin team, our members and our regular guests and visitors, who number tens of thousands every day. We currently have over 6,350 members, many of whom read us every day for updates, and hundreds of whom contribute by way of research, comment, and analysis every month.
Long-term forum members include many with professional backgrounds, including the police, the law and the medical professions, and others with technical skills in such fields as forensics, photography and statement analysis.
The forum is far and away the best-read Madeleine McCann discussion forum on the internet, and has been referred to regularly in the press and in books such as ‘Looking for Madeleine’, by Anthony Summers and Robbyn Swan.
It is with this background that we urge you to consider most carefully the following issues relating to Operation Grange.
The remit of Operation Grange
The very first consideration must be the remit allocated to Operation Grange from the outset. The relevant parts of it read as follows:
“The activity, in the first instance, will be that of an ‘investigative review’. This will entail a review of the whole of the investigation(s) which have been conducted in to the circumstances of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance. The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);
The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies,
UK Law Enforcement agencies,
Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations.
“The investigative review is intended to collate, record and analyse what has gone before. It is to examine the case and seek to determine, (as if the abduction occurred in the UK) what additional, new investigative approaches we would take and which can assist the Portuguese authorities in progressing the matter…
“The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness…”.
It was clear from the outset that the initial investigative review had a strictly limited remit. That is highly unusual for any review which purports to be a genuine, comprehensive review. Most ‘cold case’ reviews start with a ‘clean sheet’, so to speak.
Crucially, however, the review insisted that it would only investigate ‘the abduction’. That meant that, from the very first, Operation Grange had ruled out any consideration of whether or not the McCanns could have been directly involved in the disappearance of Madeleine.
The purpose of this letter is not to make any accusation against the McCanns. It is simply to point out that, despite a number of indications that they may have been involved, the Operation Grange team were told from the start not to investigate them.
During his investigative review, the Investigating Officer, Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood stated that “Primarily, what we sought to do from the beginning, is trying to draw everything back to, to zero, if you like ..”. Plainly this was not the case, as any potential involvement of the McCanns was ruled out from the beginning.
In addition, on the day that your predecessor David Cameron signalled that he had ordered the Home Office to set up a review, his spokesman declared that the purpose of the review was to ‘help the family’. It was plain, then, that the officers leading the Operation Grange team were simply not allowed to consider any involvement of the McCanns in Madeleine’s disappearance.
The interim report of the Portuguese Police, 10 Septenber 2007
I will not in this letter set out the many indications that the McCanns may have been directly involved in the disappearance of their daughter. That is something that any genuine re-investigation, with a remit not limited to declaring in advance that Madeleine had been abducted, should examine. I will however refer to the interim report of the Portuguese Police, dated 10 September 2007, a document made public in July 2008. It was compiled by Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida. In a lengthy document, the contents of which have never been convincingly refuted, he set out the following indications that the McCanns may have been involved. These are all direct quotations from a translation of his report:
1 No abduction “As time went by, the abduction scenario was not confirmed. The abduction hypothesis did not stand up”.
2 The McCanns worked on their version of events “The information that was initially collected from family and friends was uncertain. In addition, the McCanns and their friends worked on their account of events in order to strengthen and defend their version of what had happened Madeleine”
3 ‘Distorted’ information “The information from the immediate family and their group of friends which is fundamental in investigating this type of crime was always distorted…The group’s initial informal statements given during the initial stages of the investigation immediately introduced the abduction hypothesis. But even simple things were the subject of misinformation:
was the window open or closed?
was the shutter up or down?
was the balcony door open or closed?
was the front door merely shut or locked with a key?
4 Changes of story “The media attention that has been given to the case and the search for information by the said media has led to an evolution in Madeleine’s parents’ statements. All the information that has been made public has contributed to the McCanns rebuilding and adapting their story to fit the eventual police questions”.
5 Excuses for corpse scent and blood “When the media first informed the public that blood had been detected ‘in the car and in the apartment’, Dr Kate McCann and members of her family made statements to the public with the simple excuse that it had been someone who had access to the apartment that had deliberately placed this evidence there. Now they even say that it was the criminal investigation team that placed this ‘false’ evidence (i.e. blood and cadaver odour in the apartment and in the car). In an attempt to justify the finding of [Madeleine’s] blood in the apartment, Dr Kate McCann went even further, stating on that occasion that Madeleine sometimes suffered nosebleeds”.
6 Altering the crime scene “There is strong evidence that the crime scene was altered, and some furniture was moved around: an intentional alteration of things in that apartment took place, in order to create a false scenario that doesn’t match reality, in an attempt to develop opportunities to create a bogus abduction scenario. Those changes are indications that the abduction was a stage-managed simulation.
7 Findings of a top sniffer dog handler In addition, Tavares de Almeide listed the findings of top British dog handler, Martin Grime, who now works for the F.B.I. in the U.S. In early August 2007, he took with him to Portugal two springer spaniels, Eddie, a ‘cadaver dog’ who was trained to alert to the past presence of a corpse, and Keela, a ‘blood dog’ trained to detect blood. According to Mr Grime, the two dogs between them alerted on 17 occasions either to the scent of the past presence of a corpse or to blood in locations connected to the McCanns: their apartment, their clothes and in their hired car. They alerted to no other items or locations in Praia da Luz.
8 The unreliable evidence of Jane Tanner “Continuing with our analysis of information offered to us, one of the group’s members, Jane Tanner…became an important witness…She said she saw someone crossing the street at dinner time from the location of the McCanns’ apartment towards Robert Murat’s house…This information directed and occupied our work for a long time. This may be an example of how information that is not correct may not only delay the investigation but could even have led to losing the little girl. Jane Tanner insisted on the truthfulness of her account. This led to certain scenarios being developed. But these scenarios were not sustained in reality...”
9 “The precise moment when Jane Tanner chose to make her statement about what she had ‘seen’ and the explanation for choosing that moment, is unreal. That is to say: it is not easy to accept that any witness (from the group), on seeing someone with a child in their arms walking away from the McCanns’ apartment, didn’t act and speak immediately. Then there is her description of the abductor being altered, or ‘perfected’. These reasons mean there is little credibility in what she says”
10 “There was a discrepancy [about the moment Jane Tanner allegedly saw an abductor] between the statements of Dr Gerald McCann and Jane Tanner. They claimed to have passed each other at only two or three metres’ distance [7 to 10 feet], yet failed to see each other. How could they position themselves as both being together in quite a confined space, yet both fail to see each other walking by; or, more correctly, one sees the other but the other doesn’t see her? Even the exact location where they supposedly crossed each other’s paths is not very well defined by both”.
The following are direct quotations from Tavares de Almeida’s report, on the subject of the alerts by Martin Grime’s cadaver dogs:
“Apartment 5A, Ocean Club resort, the McCanns’ apartment from where the child disappeared: The cadaver dog alerted to the scent of a corpse in the master bedroom, in a corner, by the wardrobe; in living room, behind the sofa, and by the side window, while the bloodhound alerted to blood in the living room behind the sofa, and by the side window (in exactly the same spot that had been signalled by the cadaver dog)”.
“Front garden of Apartment 5A: The cadaver dog alerted to the scent of a corpse on one of the flower beds (the dog handler however commented on the ‘lightness’ of the odour in this location)”.
“The McCann family’s clothes and belongings: The cadaver dog alerted to the scent of a corpse on two pieces of clothing belonging to Dr Kate McCann, one piece of clothing belonging to Madeleine (a red T-shirt) and on Madeleine’s soft toy [Cuddle Cat]. The cadaver odour was detected when the toy was still inside the McCanns’ residence in July 2007; the scent was later confirmed outside the house as well”.
“The vehicle that was used by the McCann family: The cadaver dog alerted to the scent of a corpse on the car key and on the inside of the car boot, while the bloodhound also marked the car key and the inside of the car boot”.
“In a total of 10 cars examined [in an underground car park) the cadaver dog and the blood dog marked only the car of the McCann family, first rented on 27 May”.
Tavares de Almeida concluded his report as follows:
“From everything that was established, the facts point in the direction of the death of Madeleine McCann occurring on the night of 3 May 2007, inside apartment 5A, at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, which was occupied by the McCann couple and by their three children. There is a coincidence between the markings of cadaver odour and blood [by the two dogs], according to the (partial) Laboratory Report that has been annexed to the files.
“The said marking occurred behind the living room sofa (cadaver odour/blood/DNA), which unarguably proves that said piece of furniture was pushed back by someone, after the death of Madeleine McCann was confirmed. Because of the few traces that were recovered on location and subject to examination, it has to be admitted as a strong hypothesis that it [the room] was subject to a clean-up operation at some time following the occurrence of death”.
“From everything that we have discovered, our files result in the following conclusions:
A the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007
B a simulation - a staged hoax - of an abduction took place
C in order to render the child’s death impossible before 10.00pm, a situation of checking of the McCann couple’s children while they slept was concocted
D Dr Gerald McCann and Dr Kate McCann are involved in the concealment of the corpse of their daughter, Madeleine McCann
E at this moment, there seems to be no strong indications that the child’s death was other than the result of a tragic accident…
F from what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, did not want to deliver up Madeleine’s corpse immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility therefore that it was moved from the initial place where she died. This situation may raise questions concerning the circumstances in which the death of the child took place.
I should at this point add the explanations that the McCanns have given for the alerts of the two dogs.
Dr Gerry McCann is on record as stating, to as Portuguese interviewer: “I can tell you that we have also looked at evidence about cadaver dogs and they are incredibly unreliable”. This statement contradicts the evidence from many disciplines, not only searching for corpse scent and blood, but also explosives, drugs (even being able to distinguish between different types of explosive material and different drugs) and even medical conditions. Sniffer dogs are used increasingly and to strikingly good effect in many fields in countries all over the world.
By contrast, the settled view of Dr Kate McCann, as set out on page of her book ‘madeleine’, is that the dogs made ‘false’ alerts because of ‘the conscious or unconscious signals of the handler”. This amounts to an attack on the professional integrity and judgment of Mr Grime and implies that the dogs were ‘mistaken’ in all of their 17 alerts to corpse scent and blood.
In addition, In the days immediately following leaks about the dogs’ findings, the McCanns and members of their family came up with a series of bizarre and increasingly desperate explanations for them. These included that any blood was from Madeleine having nosebleeds, or having scratched herself when climbing the steps to the aircraft, or from mosquitoes flying into the walls, or that any cadaver odour was due to carrying dirty nappies or rotting meat in their hired car, or to Kate McCann’s clothes and the soft toy, Cuddle cat, having been contaminated by her having visited six people who had died in the fortnight before they left for their holiday.
There is no evidence that Operation Grange has addressed these issues, though it has been supplied to them with full references.
New research: A photograph, evidence of collusion, and other matters
During the nine years since Madeleine was reported missing, members of my forum, and many others elsewhere, have added to the concerns about the possible involvement of the McCanns in Madeleine’s disappearance. It would be impossible in a short letter to even list all these concerns. They are all available for the police to see on my forum and on many other places on the internet.
I will however mention just two significant matters.
The photographic evidence of Madeleine’s presence in Praia da Luz on the McCanns’ holiday is confined to just five photographs. Three of those five are genuine photographs taken on the first day of their holiday, Saturday 28 April. A fourth, allegedly showing Madeleine holding tennis balls on a tennis court in Praia da Luz, has been claimed to have been taken by two different people and on two different days. There are other aspects of that photograph that also cast doubt as to its true provenance. A fifth photograph, of Gerry McCann sitting by a pool with his daughters Madeleine and Amelia, is claimed by the McCanns to have been taken at 2.29pm on the day Madeleine was reported missing. They have called it ‘The Last Photo’.
However, evidence discussed on my forum suggests that this key photograph may have been taken earlier in the week, probably on the Sunday. There is no indication that Operation Grange has addressed this evidence.
Second, there is the strange and striking correlation of two reports, made respectively by Jane Tanner and Martin Smith, alleging they had seen a man carrying a young child on the night of 3 May 2007, with a third report by a Spanish ex-pat living in Germany Nuno Lourenco, in which he alleged that a Portuguese holidaymaker, Wojchiech Krokowski, had tried to kidnap his own daughter on Sunday 29 April. Nuno Lourenco’s statement can be shown to be demonstrably false, yet his description of Krokowski is matched in almost every detail by the descriptions of Jane Tanner and Martin Smith. In particular, each of the three uses this meaningless phrase to describe the man: “He didn’t look like a tourist”. These facts, prima facie, suggest collusion to promote Krokowski as the likely abductor. This alleged collusion is clearly a matter which should have been addressed by Operation Grange, but there is no evidence that it has been.
These issues have been further complicated by the former Investigation Officer of Operation Grange, Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, having claimed to a 7 million audience on BBC Crimewatch on 14 October 2103 that the person seen by Jane Tanner had ‘come forward’, six years later. We were told that he had been carrying his young child home from the night creche, with no mention made of where the child’s mother was. He was said to have been carrying his child in exactly the same way as described by Jane Tanner, with no buggy, no blanket and only dressed in pyjamas. It was dark and cold (13 deg C) at the time. The identity of this person who had suddenly emerged after six years was not disclosed. In addition, if he had been taking the route from the creche described by DCI Redwood, he could not have been taking the shortest route to his apartment. For these reasons and others, many people have real cause to doubt whether DCI Redwood was being truthful.
Members of my forum and others have on many occasions submitted detailed evidence to Operation Grange on these and other issues, but there is no evidence that these lines of enquiry have been followed up.
The appointment of Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell as the Senior Investigating Officer for Operation Grange
There is one other issue about the remit that has caused widespread concern, and that is why former Detective Chief Superintendent Hamish Campbell was chosen to head Operation Grange and allowed to set the remit. The action for which Hamish Campbell is best known is having been the Investigating Officer into the as-yet-unsolved murder of Jill Dando. His work on the case resulted in an innocent man, Barry George/Bulsara, being wrongly jailed for eight years. There were credible suggestions, though never proved, that the conviction of Barry George was secured by a member of the Metropolitan Police placing an amount of firearms residue, matching the known weapon used to kill Jill Dando, in his coat pocket. Hamish Campbell’s role in that utterly botched police investigation surely made him an unsuitable choice to head up one of the most controversial and expensive reviews and investigations undertaken by the Metropolitan Police.
The employment by the McCanns of wholly inappropriate private detection agencies and individuals
I turn now to this aspect of Operation Grange’s remit:
“The focus of the review will be of the material held by three main stakeholders (and in the following order of primacy);
The Portuguese Law Enforcement agencies,
UK Law Enforcement agencies,
Other private investigative agencies/staff and organisations”.
I and my fellow members seriously question the designation of ‘other private investigation agencies/staff’ as ‘stakeholders’. Clearly, what is mainly being referred to here is the McCanns’ own private investigations. DCI Redwood made it clear on a number of occasions that he regarded the McCanns’ own investigations as being of real merit and interest. Pictures were seen in the British press of his men collecting boxes of documentary material from the offices, in Barcelona, of Metodo 3, one of the detective agencies used by the McCanns. Two e-fits of a man carrying a child said to have been seen by Mr Martin Smith and his family were drawn up by Henri Exton, one of the investigators employed by the McCanns, in the spring of 2008. These e-fits lay gathering dust until suddenly, on 14 October 2013, DCI Redwood produced them, saying that they were now “the centre of Operation Grange’s focus”. These two examples demonstrate without question that Operation Grange have relied to a considerable extent on the material supplied by the various ‘other private investigation agencies/staff’.
However, we would seriously question whether they were right to do so, based on all that is now known about the agencies and people involved in the McCanns’ private investigations, for which, as we know, they received very generous donations, amounting to millions of pounds, from a generous British public.
In an Appendix, I have provided a list of the main agencies and individuals that the McCanns have employed as part of their private investigations, and what is known about each. In summary, the two main private investigation agencies employed by the McCanns, namely Metodo 3 and Oakley International, were run by crooks. None of the individuals or agencies used seem to have had any experience whatsoever of finding missing children or adults. All have very dubious backgrounds and histories. I suggest that the Metropolitan Police must have known this from the beginning, since at least some of the facts I set out in the Appendix have been published in Britain’s mainstream media, and in places on the internet (including my own). How, therefore, in the light of the extraordinary conduct of these agencies and individuals, could the Metropolitan Police possibly claim that such material could assist in their investigations?
Given the appalling track record of these agencies and individuals, may I respectfully suggest that much more light will be shed on what really happened to Madeleine McCann if you begin with a fresh police force and a fresh remit. Any new police force should then interview under caution any U.K. individuals who have worked for the McCanns (see the Appendix for a list of names). It would also be useful for any new police force to interview former Metodo 3 employee, Julian Peribanez, who worked on the Madeleine McCann case. Two years ago, he published a book which contained a damning indictment of the corruption and criminality within Metodo 3. His claims amount to an accusation that Metodo 3 was, in effect, never employed to search for Madeleine at all. This matches an account written by Christie Twomey for The Times in early 2008, in which she also made strong criticisms of Metodo 3 and two if its staff.
The major involvement of the government and the security services in supporting the McCanns
As Prime Minister and the nation’s Home Secretary from May 2010 to July 2016, you will know better than almost anyone else about the extensive involvement of the government and the security services ever since Madeleine McCann was reported missing. This has seemed to a great many people to have been wholly disproportionate. Moreover, it has not led to Madeleine being found nor to the arrest of anyone responsible for her disappearance. I can only summarise here some of this high-level government support:
1 Appointing, within days of Madeleine’s reported disappearance, the Head of the government’s Media Monitoring Unit, Clarence Mitchell, to be the McCanns’ public relations spokesman, a post he held for nine years
2 The reported, successful efforts of former Prime Minister, Gordon Brown to persuade the Portuguese police to release the description of a possible abductor, based on the claims of the McCanns’ friend Jane Tanner
3 The direct involvement of MI5, as disclosed by Portuguese investigation co-ordinator Goncalo Amaral, in his book ‘The Truth of the Lie’
4 The role of the British Ambassador in Portugal, interfering with the Portuguese police who were trying to seize items for forensic testing from the McCanns in the early days
5 Delays by the then Home Secretary in 2007 and 2008 in processing requests by the Portuguese authorities for rogatory interviews
6 The reported involvement of Special Branch officers, who met with the McCanns at East Midlands Airport and drove them to their home the day they returned from Portugal
7 Setting up a top secret national co-ordinating committee on the Madeleine McCann case on 8 May 2007, under the chairmanship of the Head of Leicestershire Constabulary, Matt Baggott
8 Leicestershire Police officers deliberately delaying sending relevant evidence to the Portuguese Police, advising Jane Tanner ahead of an identity parade in which she purported to identify Robert Murat as the person she had seen carrying a child the night Madeleine was reported missing (leading to his arrest)
9 British criminal profilers identifying Robert Murat as fitting the likely profile of the abductor to the extent of 90% of likely characteristics
10 The former Prime Minister acceding to a request made by his friend Rebekah Brooks, CEO of Rupert Murdoch’s News International empire, to set up Operation Grange, reportedly after threatening him with ‘a week of bad headlines about Theresa May.
These are only examples of the government’s heavy involvement in this case.
The McCanns’ public appeal for funds
There are several issues regarding the McCanns’ fund-raising efforts which do not appear to have been addressed by Operation Grange at all. Some of these are set out in lengthy papers written by qualified accountant, Enid O’Dowd, and can be read on the internet.
One issue is that the McCanns’ ‘Find Madeleine Fund’ is a private trust and company and not a charity. Moreover, it is quite clearly controlled by the McCanns and close members of their family and friends, although to the public it appears to be a charity.
Several contradictory statements have been made by the McCanns and those backing them about the use to which the funds have been put. Statements were made that funds would ‘only be used for the search’. However, contrary statements have been made suggesting that significant monies from the fund have been used to pay the McCanns’ legal fees and costs.
Apart from that, why has the public’s money apparently been squandered on the ill-chosen agencies and individuals employed by the McCanns, a responsibility also shared of course with each one of the Directors of the Fund? How could it be, for example, that the McCanns paid Kevin Halligen, said in newspaper articles to be a serial fraudster, £500,000 plus expenses for four months’ work, during which he was for most of the time living a 5-star life of luxury in hotels in Britain and the U.S, with his girlfriend, Shirin Trachiotis? Does the public not need Operation Grange, or others, to provide answers to these questions?
More recently, on 2 September 2015, the McCanns’ spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, said:: “They [the McCanns] realise that [Operation Grange] cannot go on forever. A newspaper report informed the public that Mitchell had explained “how former GP Kate and heart doctor Gerry, both 37, of Rothley, Leics., had moved money from the publicly-backed Find-Madeleine-Fund into a special account in anticipation of having to finance the hunt for their daughter themselves". The public, when they gave money to the Find Madeleine Fund, would not expect the Directors to then create a separate fund, which was reported as being controlled just by the McCanns.
What should happen now
I have set out the case that Operation Grange has not succeeded in its search for the truth because of its inappropriately limited remit. I have also referred to justified criticisms about the operation of the Find Madeleine Fund.
Despite impressive statistics released from time to time of the numbers of documents studied, lines of enquiry pursued, rogatory requests submitted, numbers of suspects or persons of interest questioned, etc., it seems plain that after well over six years, Operation Grange is nowhere nearer to solving this case.
You will be aware that thousands of people, among them professionals such as police officers, criminal profilers, criminologists, doctors, psychiatrists and statement analysts, have questioned the McCanns’ account of events.
At the same time, we have seen in the press over recent years many accounts of senior-level police corruption in the Metropolitan Police force.
An analysis of the case by 'PeterMac', a retired Police Superintendent, and other evidence submitted by members of my forum
'PeterMac', a retired Police Superintendent, has studied the Madeleine McCann case for nine years, and conducted original research on key evidential issues in the case. I am aware that he has submitted a great deal of evidence to the respective Senior Investigating Officers, always obtaining a receipt for the information he has sent them. His analysis, which by implication is highly critical of Operation Grange, has been presented in a free e-book which can now be read at this link:
http://whatreallyhappenedtomadeleinemccann.blogspot.co.uk/
Other members of my forum have also submitted evidence and have been assured verbally and in writing that all the evidence they have submitted is being kept on computer and has been taken into consideration. It will therefore be available for any fresh police force, not bound by a restricted remit, to investigate.
On behalf of the members of my forum, therefore, I call on you to:
1 Appoint independent assessors of proven integrity and independence to evaluate the work of Operation Grange, and make its findings public. In this respect, may I remind you of this part of the review’s remit, as determined by DCS Hamish Campbell: “The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness…” Any such report must include a full investigation into the huge involvement in this case of MI5, Special Branch and other government or government-backed security agencies;
2 Appoint, via the new Home Secretary, a different police force, which has the highest possible reputation for integrity and independence, to investigate the reported disappearance of Madeleine McCann;
3 Ensure that any new police investigation has an unlimited remit and can therefore go to wherever the evidence leads them;
4 Order the relevant government department to investigate all aspects of the operation of the Find Madeleine Fund, including:
A investigating the actions of all of its Directors,
B the funding of the private investigations,
C whether or not funds have been used to pay the McCanns’ legal fees and expenses,
D why it was necessary for a separate account to be set up last year, to be controlled by the McCanns and not the Directors, and
E accounting for all monies paid into and from the Find Madeleine Fund since it was set up in May 2007.
I shall send the same letter to Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe but I urge you to seek an urgent meeting with him to discuss the contents of my letter. Please give this matter your most careful consideration and I shall look forward to your response in the near future.
Yours sincerely
_______________________
Jill Havern
For and on behalf of the members of ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’
The Appendix can be read on the forum: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13153-draft-letter-to-prime-minister-re-operation-grange-comments-please
The Barcelona Connection: How the capital of Catalonia played a major part in events following the disappearance of Madeleine McCann
The Barcelona Connection: How the capital of Catalonia played a major part in events following the disappearance of Madeleine McCann
Perhaps one day we will know more about this interesting subject. Maybe someone who is a member of or visitor to this forum has information on the subject.
Meanwhile, here are the bare facts:
1 In an article about Cheshire businessman Brian Kennedy many years back, he was described as ‘spending half of the year in Spain' (most likely the winter season!)
2 Subsequently it emerged that he owns a villa in or on the outskirts of Barcelona
3 A long-standing member of CMOMM who has stated that he is a personal friend of Brian Kennedy, and who has made around 400 posts on the forum, also lives in Barcelona
4 We do not know exactly when, but either in September 2007 or even before that, Brian Kennedy has been appointed by the McCanns to head up their ‘private search for Madeleine’ and chose the controversial and now discredited Spanish detective agency, Metodo 3, to be his lead investigation agency. They were based in Barcelona. Some say there are grounds for believing that Brian Kennedy must have known Metodo 3 well before September 2007
5 Metodo 3’s main investigators, Francisco Marco, Antonio Gimenez Raso, Antonio Tamarit and Julian Peribanez were all based in Barcelona
PIC: FRANCISCO MARCO, Boss of Metodo 3
6 On 13 November 2007 Marco and Gimenez Raso travelled from Barcelona to meet with Brain Kennedy at the PJ’s Portimao headquarters. They furnished the PJ with three ‘credible sightings’. All three of course turned out to be false trails
7 On 10 December 2007, Marco and Gimenez Raso again travelled from Barcelona, this time to meet, at the Arade Dam, Portugal, with Marcos Aragao Correia, the dodgy lawyer from Madeira who was subsequently employed by the McCann Team to prosecute Goncalo Amaral. There they plotted two strange searches of the Arade Dam, in January and March 2008, which were conducted by Correia. Detectives from Metodo 3 in Barcelona again travelled to the Arade Dam to collect the exhibits of bones and clothes dragged by divers from the lake
8 On 17 February 2008, McCann Team investigator Gimenez Raso was arrested and charged with supplying information to a gang which had stolen 25 kilos of cocaine from a boat in Barcelona harbor in 2004. At that time (2004) Gimenez Raso held a post of detective inspector for the regional drugs and trafficking squad, based in Barcelona
9 During the time Brian Kennedy employed him, Gary Hagland travelled to Barcelona to meet with Metodo 3 operatives
10 In August 2009, the McCann Team held a major press conference to highlight a possible sighting of Madeleine. The information was provided by an anonymous British banker or businessman who had been drinking all evening in the bars around Barcelona docks on Sunday 6 May 2007 (three days after Madeleine’s disappearance). He claimed that a Victoria Beckham-lookalike, aged around 20 with an Australian accent, had approached him on the dockside at 2am and asked him: ‘Have you got my new daughter’. He had apparently ‘agonised’ for two years before releasing this worthless piece of information. It was suggested by the McCann Team that Madeleine had been abducted on a yacht which had sailed from Praia da Luz to Barcelona. A few weeks later, Mark Hollingsworth wrote this in the Evening Standard:
“It was billed as a ‘significant development’ in the exhaustive search for Madeleine McCann. At a recent dramatic press conference in London, the lead private investigator David Edgar, a retired Cheshire detective inspector, brandished an E-FIT image of an Australian woman, described her as ‘a bit of a Victoria Beckham lookalike’, and appealed for help in tracing her. The woman was seen ‘looking agitated’ outside a restaurant in Barcelona three days after Madeleine’s disappearance. ‘It is a strong lead’, said Edgar, wearing a pin-stripe suit in front of a bank of cameras and microphones. ‘Madeleine could have been in Barcelona by that point. The fact the conversation took place near the marina could be significant.’
“But within days reporters discovered that the private detectives had failed to make the most basic enquiries before announcing their potential breakthrough. Members of Edgar’s team who visited Barcelona had failed to speak to anyone working at the restaurant near where the agitated woman was seen that night, neglected to ask if the mystery woman had been filmed on CCTV cameras and knew nothing about the arrival of an Australian luxury yacht just after Madeleine vanished”.
11 In her book, ‘madeleine’, Dr Kate McCann wrote about the legal help the family had been receiving: “Adam Tudor and his colleague Isabel Hudson continue to do a vast amount of work for us, without payment…” Isabel Hudson was later to feature as the Carter-Ruck solicitor who conducted the legal proceedings from 2009 to 2013 against Tony Bennett. In 2008, she referred to how much she enjoyed regular weekends flying to Barcelona and walking in the Catalonian hills around Barcelona. In 2012 it was announced that she had married a Mr Xavier Martorell from Barcelona and she is now known as Isabel Martorell. It was in the Martorell No. 1 court, Barcelona, that McCann investigator Giminez Raso was tried over his alleged involvement with the 27-strong, exceptionally violent criminal gang that had stolen the cocaine from a boat in Barcelona harbour. He was found not guilty, but only after the judge lectured him that “You allowed yourself to get far too close to members of this gang”
12 Metodo 3 finally went out of business in 2014 after its boss Francisco Marco was found to have ordered his staff to illegally record private conversations between top Catalonian politicians at 'Le Petit Paris', a restaurant in Barcelona.
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13139-the-barcelona-connection-how-the-capital-of-catalonia-played-a-major-part-in-events-following-the-disappearance-of-madeleine-mccann
Perhaps one day we will know more about this interesting subject. Maybe someone who is a member of or visitor to this forum has information on the subject.
Meanwhile, here are the bare facts:
1 In an article about Cheshire businessman Brian Kennedy many years back, he was described as ‘spending half of the year in Spain' (most likely the winter season!)
2 Subsequently it emerged that he owns a villa in or on the outskirts of Barcelona
3 A long-standing member of CMOMM who has stated that he is a personal friend of Brian Kennedy, and who has made around 400 posts on the forum, also lives in Barcelona
4 We do not know exactly when, but either in September 2007 or even before that, Brian Kennedy has been appointed by the McCanns to head up their ‘private search for Madeleine’ and chose the controversial and now discredited Spanish detective agency, Metodo 3, to be his lead investigation agency. They were based in Barcelona. Some say there are grounds for believing that Brian Kennedy must have known Metodo 3 well before September 2007
5 Metodo 3’s main investigators, Francisco Marco, Antonio Gimenez Raso, Antonio Tamarit and Julian Peribanez were all based in Barcelona
PIC: FRANCISCO MARCO, Boss of Metodo 3
6 On 13 November 2007 Marco and Gimenez Raso travelled from Barcelona to meet with Brain Kennedy at the PJ’s Portimao headquarters. They furnished the PJ with three ‘credible sightings’. All three of course turned out to be false trails
7 On 10 December 2007, Marco and Gimenez Raso again travelled from Barcelona, this time to meet, at the Arade Dam, Portugal, with Marcos Aragao Correia, the dodgy lawyer from Madeira who was subsequently employed by the McCann Team to prosecute Goncalo Amaral. There they plotted two strange searches of the Arade Dam, in January and March 2008, which were conducted by Correia. Detectives from Metodo 3 in Barcelona again travelled to the Arade Dam to collect the exhibits of bones and clothes dragged by divers from the lake
8 On 17 February 2008, McCann Team investigator Gimenez Raso was arrested and charged with supplying information to a gang which had stolen 25 kilos of cocaine from a boat in Barcelona harbor in 2004. At that time (2004) Gimenez Raso held a post of detective inspector for the regional drugs and trafficking squad, based in Barcelona
9 During the time Brian Kennedy employed him, Gary Hagland travelled to Barcelona to meet with Metodo 3 operatives
10 In August 2009, the McCann Team held a major press conference to highlight a possible sighting of Madeleine. The information was provided by an anonymous British banker or businessman who had been drinking all evening in the bars around Barcelona docks on Sunday 6 May 2007 (three days after Madeleine’s disappearance). He claimed that a Victoria Beckham-lookalike, aged around 20 with an Australian accent, had approached him on the dockside at 2am and asked him: ‘Have you got my new daughter’. He had apparently ‘agonised’ for two years before releasing this worthless piece of information. It was suggested by the McCann Team that Madeleine had been abducted on a yacht which had sailed from Praia da Luz to Barcelona. A few weeks later, Mark Hollingsworth wrote this in the Evening Standard:
“It was billed as a ‘significant development’ in the exhaustive search for Madeleine McCann. At a recent dramatic press conference in London, the lead private investigator David Edgar, a retired Cheshire detective inspector, brandished an E-FIT image of an Australian woman, described her as ‘a bit of a Victoria Beckham lookalike’, and appealed for help in tracing her. The woman was seen ‘looking agitated’ outside a restaurant in Barcelona three days after Madeleine’s disappearance. ‘It is a strong lead’, said Edgar, wearing a pin-stripe suit in front of a bank of cameras and microphones. ‘Madeleine could have been in Barcelona by that point. The fact the conversation took place near the marina could be significant.’
“But within days reporters discovered that the private detectives had failed to make the most basic enquiries before announcing their potential breakthrough. Members of Edgar’s team who visited Barcelona had failed to speak to anyone working at the restaurant near where the agitated woman was seen that night, neglected to ask if the mystery woman had been filmed on CCTV cameras and knew nothing about the arrival of an Australian luxury yacht just after Madeleine vanished”.
11 In her book, ‘madeleine’, Dr Kate McCann wrote about the legal help the family had been receiving: “Adam Tudor and his colleague Isabel Hudson continue to do a vast amount of work for us, without payment…” Isabel Hudson was later to feature as the Carter-Ruck solicitor who conducted the legal proceedings from 2009 to 2013 against Tony Bennett. In 2008, she referred to how much she enjoyed regular weekends flying to Barcelona and walking in the Catalonian hills around Barcelona. In 2012 it was announced that she had married a Mr Xavier Martorell from Barcelona and she is now known as Isabel Martorell. It was in the Martorell No. 1 court, Barcelona, that McCann investigator Giminez Raso was tried over his alleged involvement with the 27-strong, exceptionally violent criminal gang that had stolen the cocaine from a boat in Barcelona harbour. He was found not guilty, but only after the judge lectured him that “You allowed yourself to get far too close to members of this gang”
12 Metodo 3 finally went out of business in 2014 after its boss Francisco Marco was found to have ordered his staff to illegally record private conversations between top Catalonian politicians at 'Le Petit Paris', a restaurant in Barcelona.
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13139-the-barcelona-connection-how-the-capital-of-catalonia-played-a-major-part-in-events-following-the-disappearance-of-madeleine-mccann
Multi-million Maddie probe gets new cash injection
Operation
Grange, the Metropolitan police investigation into the disappearance of
Madeleine McCann has just been given a fresh cash-injection of €100,000
- after €14 million-worth of taxpayers’ money has been ploughed into it
since 2011.
The new chunk of funding is expected to keep the inquiry alive until next April, say British tabloids.
It had been reported that Operation Grange was due to be wound up in October.
The Daily Mirror quoted a police source only last month saying the probe was “expected to be shelved amid concerns about its spiralling cost while other areas of policing face budget cuts”.
But between then and now, “a request for more cash was submitted to the Home Office” and signed off, says the Daily Star.
Thus, the hunt will “carry on until at least April”.
The Star quotes a spokesman for the Home Office saying: “The resources required will be reviewed again at this point.”
Grange’s manpower was vastly scaled down last year from 31 officers to four, and it is reported to be following “only one line of inquiry” - that centring on abduction following a botched burglary.
There are also apparently no plans for further forensic work (click here).
natasha.donn@algarveresident.com
http://portugalresident.com/multi-million-maddie-probe-gets-new-cash-injection
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13137-madeline-mccann-fresh-cash-lifeline-in-search-for-missing-child
The new chunk of funding is expected to keep the inquiry alive until next April, say British tabloids.
It had been reported that Operation Grange was due to be wound up in October.
The Daily Mirror quoted a police source only last month saying the probe was “expected to be shelved amid concerns about its spiralling cost while other areas of policing face budget cuts”.
But between then and now, “a request for more cash was submitted to the Home Office” and signed off, says the Daily Star.
Thus, the hunt will “carry on until at least April”.
The Star quotes a spokesman for the Home Office saying: “The resources required will be reviewed again at this point.”
Grange’s manpower was vastly scaled down last year from 31 officers to four, and it is reported to be following “only one line of inquiry” - that centring on abduction following a botched burglary.
There are also apparently no plans for further forensic work (click here).
natasha.donn@algarveresident.com
http://portugalresident.com/multi-million-maddie-probe-gets-new-cash-injection
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13137-madeline-mccann-fresh-cash-lifeline-in-search-for-missing-child
100 Reasons why Kate and Gerry McCann should be investigated
1. Did they use the babysitting service provided? NO
2. Did they use any listening devices? NO
3. Did they leave three children under 4 alone while going out drinking? YES
4. Did they do this every night? YES
5. Did they,under British law,endanger Maddie? YES
6. In the UK is significant harm a form of child abuse? YES
7. Is significant harm used by the UK courts in child abuse cases? YES
8. Does leaving the children as they did qualify under these rules ? YES
9. Did Kate sit writing timelines instead of searching for Maddie? YES
10. Are the frequent checks by the Tapas group challenged by other witnesses? YES
11. Was the bedroom within sight of where they sat? NO
12, Were they within earshot? NO
13. Did anyone other than Tanner see any abductor? NO
14. Has anyone come up with a credible abductor? NO
15. Is there any evidence of an abduction? NO
16. Were the shutters in the room tampered with? NO
17. Did Kate say the shutters were tampered with? YES
18. Did Kate change her story to saying the door was unlocked? YES
19. Was the door unlocked on any other night? NO
20. Is there any physical evidence at all of a break in? NO
21. Is there any physical evidence of another party being in the room? NO
23. Were the McCann's told not to inform the media? YES
24. Were they told it might harm the chances of finding Maddie alive? YES
25. Were the media informed by a McCann family member? YES
26. Were specially trained British dogs brought in to search the apartment ? YES
27. Did they find anything? YES
28. Have these dogs been successful in over 200 cases? YES
29. Do sniffer dogs lie? NO
30. Do the specially trained dogs get confused by other smells? NO
31. Did they find cadaver(dead body) scent in the apartment? YES
32. Did they find blood? YES
33. Did they find cadaver scent behind the sofa? YES
34. On the child's toy? YES
35. In a cupboard in the room? YES
36. Did they find cadaver scent on Kate's clothes? YES
37. Did someone try to explain this by saying she had examined dead bodies before holiday? YES
38. Is there any record of her doing so? NO
39. Has anyone come forward to say they saw her doing so? NO
40. Was the hire car rented after Maddie disappeared ? YES
41. Were tests done on DNA found in the car? YES
42. Did the dogs alert to the hire car? YES
43. Is a billion to one odds that it may be someone else's DNA? YES
44. Were the doors and boot left open to get rid of the smell in the car? YES
45. Did the parents explain it away as rotting meat? YES
46. Smelling due to taking rubbish to the tip in the hire car? YES
47. Smelling due to dirty nappies in the hire car? YES
48. Smell due to sea bass in the hire car? YES
49. Did the parents say the dogs were wrong? YES
50. Do you need tons of excuses if the dogs are just plain wrong? NO
51. Have the dogs ever been wrong? NO
52. Did Kate & Gerry flee Portugal? YES
53. Did they hire extradition lawyers? YES
54. Did the McCann's hire libel lawyers to gag anyone with a different view? YES
55. Did the government lend spin doctor Clarence Mitchell to the parents? YES
56. Dio spin doctors twist the truth for a favourable outcome? YES
57. Are they paid to do this? YES
58. Did the McCann's set up a fund in order to search for Maddie? YES
59. Did they use the money donated for anything other than searching? YES
60. Do the parents have a media monitoring unit? YES
61. Are there internet trolls helping the parents to quash getting at the truth? YES
62. Have the Portuguese police been portrayed as incompetent? YES
63. Did they look at all aspects of the case? YES
64. Did they conclude any abduction took place? NO
65. Did they conclude that Maddie was dead and the parents responsible? YES
66. Are there two British investigations into Maddie being missing? YES
67. Are they investigating ALL aspects of the case? NO (Amended UNCLEAR)
68. Have they been told by the government to focus on abduction only? YES (Amended UNCLEAR)
69. Have they come up with any evidence of an abduction? NO (Amended UNCLEAR)
70. Have they come up with any credible suspects? NO Amended (UNCLEAR)
71. Have they questioned the tapas group or parents over the case? NO (Amended UNCLEAR)
72. Have the parents made millions from Maddie being missing? YES
73. Did Kate write a book that the twins might read mention torn genitalia ? YES
74. Did Gerry have his wallet stolen at Waterloo station as he claimed? NO
75. Does the CCTV footage from that day bear out his claims? NO
76. Did the Portuguese police ask British government for medical records? YES
77. Were they handed over? NO
78. Did they ask for bank statements? YES
79. Were they handed over ? NO
80. Did they ask for mobile phone records? YES
81. Were they handed over? NO
82. Have the media printed the McCann version of events? YES
83. Are the media intimidated by threats of libel? YES
84. Have the parents admitted they are responsible for Maddie's disappearance? NO
85. Have the parents faced any criminal charges to date? NO
86. No charges for manslaughter? NO
87. For neglect? NO
88. Did the McCann's say they would take a polygraph(lie detector test) ? YES
89. Did the McCann "people" contact Don Cargill head of polygraph studies?YES
90. Did the McCann's tell the world they would take one to prove innocence? YES
91. Have they taken one in the 2'000+ days since saying they would? NO
92. Did the parents impose a list of conditions for taking one? YES
93. Did Don Cargill say the list was "impossible to satisfy"? YES
94. Did Don Cargill state "They had no intention of taking one"? YES
95. Did Clarence Mitchell say they were innocent and did not need to do one? YES
96. IS Amaral on trial because he wrote a book stating the facts of the case? YES
97. Is it a proper account of the police investigation ? YES
98. Have the McCann's fought desperately to have this book banned? YES
99. Is it banned? NO
100. Is maddie missing because of the actions of the parents? YES
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t9599-100-reasons-why-the-parents-belong-in-jail-should-be-under-investigation
2. Did they use any listening devices? NO
3. Did they leave three children under 4 alone while going out drinking? YES
4. Did they do this every night? YES
5. Did they,under British law,endanger Maddie? YES
6. In the UK is significant harm a form of child abuse? YES
7. Is significant harm used by the UK courts in child abuse cases? YES
8. Does leaving the children as they did qualify under these rules ? YES
9. Did Kate sit writing timelines instead of searching for Maddie? YES
10. Are the frequent checks by the Tapas group challenged by other witnesses? YES
11. Was the bedroom within sight of where they sat? NO
12, Were they within earshot? NO
13. Did anyone other than Tanner see any abductor? NO
14. Has anyone come up with a credible abductor? NO
15. Is there any evidence of an abduction? NO
16. Were the shutters in the room tampered with? NO
17. Did Kate say the shutters were tampered with? YES
18. Did Kate change her story to saying the door was unlocked? YES
19. Was the door unlocked on any other night? NO
20. Is there any physical evidence at all of a break in? NO
21. Is there any physical evidence of another party being in the room? NO
23. Were the McCann's told not to inform the media? YES
24. Were they told it might harm the chances of finding Maddie alive? YES
25. Were the media informed by a McCann family member? YES
26. Were specially trained British dogs brought in to search the apartment ? YES
27. Did they find anything? YES
28. Have these dogs been successful in over 200 cases? YES
29. Do sniffer dogs lie? NO
30. Do the specially trained dogs get confused by other smells? NO
31. Did they find cadaver(dead body) scent in the apartment? YES
32. Did they find blood? YES
33. Did they find cadaver scent behind the sofa? YES
34. On the child's toy? YES
35. In a cupboard in the room? YES
36. Did they find cadaver scent on Kate's clothes? YES
37. Did someone try to explain this by saying she had examined dead bodies before holiday? YES
38. Is there any record of her doing so? NO
39. Has anyone come forward to say they saw her doing so? NO
40. Was the hire car rented after Maddie disappeared ? YES
41. Were tests done on DNA found in the car? YES
42. Did the dogs alert to the hire car? YES
43. Is a billion to one odds that it may be someone else's DNA? YES
44. Were the doors and boot left open to get rid of the smell in the car? YES
45. Did the parents explain it away as rotting meat? YES
46. Smelling due to taking rubbish to the tip in the hire car? YES
47. Smelling due to dirty nappies in the hire car? YES
48. Smell due to sea bass in the hire car? YES
49. Did the parents say the dogs were wrong? YES
50. Do you need tons of excuses if the dogs are just plain wrong? NO
51. Have the dogs ever been wrong? NO
52. Did Kate & Gerry flee Portugal? YES
53. Did they hire extradition lawyers? YES
54. Did the McCann's hire libel lawyers to gag anyone with a different view? YES
55. Did the government lend spin doctor Clarence Mitchell to the parents? YES
56. Dio spin doctors twist the truth for a favourable outcome? YES
57. Are they paid to do this? YES
58. Did the McCann's set up a fund in order to search for Maddie? YES
59. Did they use the money donated for anything other than searching? YES
60. Do the parents have a media monitoring unit? YES
61. Are there internet trolls helping the parents to quash getting at the truth? YES
62. Have the Portuguese police been portrayed as incompetent? YES
63. Did they look at all aspects of the case? YES
64. Did they conclude any abduction took place? NO
65. Did they conclude that Maddie was dead and the parents responsible? YES
66. Are there two British investigations into Maddie being missing? YES
67. Are they investigating ALL aspects of the case? NO (Amended UNCLEAR)
68. Have they been told by the government to focus on abduction only? YES (Amended UNCLEAR)
69. Have they come up with any evidence of an abduction? NO (Amended UNCLEAR)
70. Have they come up with any credible suspects? NO Amended (UNCLEAR)
71. Have they questioned the tapas group or parents over the case? NO (Amended UNCLEAR)
72. Have the parents made millions from Maddie being missing? YES
73. Did Kate write a book that the twins might read mention torn genitalia ? YES
74. Did Gerry have his wallet stolen at Waterloo station as he claimed? NO
75. Does the CCTV footage from that day bear out his claims? NO
76. Did the Portuguese police ask British government for medical records? YES
77. Were they handed over? NO
78. Did they ask for bank statements? YES
79. Were they handed over ? NO
80. Did they ask for mobile phone records? YES
81. Were they handed over? NO
82. Have the media printed the McCann version of events? YES
83. Are the media intimidated by threats of libel? YES
84. Have the parents admitted they are responsible for Maddie's disappearance? NO
85. Have the parents faced any criminal charges to date? NO
86. No charges for manslaughter? NO
87. For neglect? NO
88. Did the McCann's say they would take a polygraph(lie detector test) ? YES
89. Did the McCann "people" contact Don Cargill head of polygraph studies?YES
90. Did the McCann's tell the world they would take one to prove innocence? YES
91. Have they taken one in the 2'000+ days since saying they would? NO
92. Did the parents impose a list of conditions for taking one? YES
93. Did Don Cargill say the list was "impossible to satisfy"? YES
94. Did Don Cargill state "They had no intention of taking one"? YES
95. Did Clarence Mitchell say they were innocent and did not need to do one? YES
96. IS Amaral on trial because he wrote a book stating the facts of the case? YES
97. Is it a proper account of the police investigation ? YES
98. Have the McCann's fought desperately to have this book banned? YES
99. Is it banned? NO
100. Is maddie missing because of the actions of the parents? YES
http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t9599-100-reasons-why-the-parents-belong-in-jail-should-be-under-investigation
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
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?'
Please click on image to view all three Madeleine films
Prime Minister introduces Prime Suspect to Royalty
Popular Posts
-
Compiled by 'Truestepper' on Sky Discussions: "It reminds me of a quote from the FBI:" "Taken alone, each piece ... -
A short paper by the Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG) DID MADELEINE MCCANN DIE ON SUNDAY 29 APRIL, FOUR DAYS BEFORE SHE WAS REPORTED... -
What happened to Madeleine McCann? 50 facts about the case that the British media are not telling you Among other things you’ll find in th...
-
Retired Police Superintendent, Peter MacLeod's free ebook: What really happened to Madeleine McCann?Written by retired Police Superintendent PeterMac: Many years have passed since the original e-book was published online, and... -
What really happened to Madeleine McCann? 10 key reasons which suggest that she was not abducted Madeleine McCann was reported missing by... -
The journalist and the film maker: "They walked past the press, sniffer dogs, police to get to the shops. But they didn't get inv... -
29. Kate McCann confessing to her mother on the ‘phone, soon after Madeleine disappeared: ‘It was an accident, Mum, it was an accident’ Wh... -
Let's not forget that Madeleine Beth McCann, aged 3, is now dead Mr Payne. Should you still be on the Medical Register? Here's ...
-
by jeanmonroe Today at 0:55 Interviewing UK Police Officer DC 1485 IVOR MESSIAH questioning Gerry McCann's 'best buddy&#...
Followers
Subscribe To
Posts
All Comments
Follow by Email
Contact Form