WHAT REALLY HAPPENED TO MADELEINE MCCANN? 60 reasons which suggest that she was not abducted

Not only have the McCanns tried, and failed, to ban Gonçalo Amaral's book "Maddie: The Truth of the Lie" and his documentary, they also banned this '60 Reasons' book, which can be read in its entirety on this link:

http://www.cwporter.com/mccann.htm

McCann spokesman, Clarence Mitchell, admits parents “sufficiently realistic” to admit Maddie “probably dead”

McCann spokesman admits parents “sufficiently realistic” to admit Maddie “probably dead”

 natasha.donn@algarveresident.com

It’s the elephant in the room that media sources, up until now, have been carefully avoiding.

Page 38, clause 75 of the Supreme Court ruling that blew a massive hole in the plans of Madeleine McCann’s parents to block the book by former PJ coordinator Gonçalo Amaral - that suggests they essentially invented their daughter’s abduction - states that as early as October 2007 (only five months after the little girl went missing), the couple’s spokesman Clarence Mitchell “affirmed” that Kate and Gerry McCann “were sufficiently realistic to admit that their daughter was probably dead”.

In other words, nine months before Amaral even wrote the book that the couple claim “hampered the search” for their missing daughter, they were already “sufficiently realistic” to admit that the search would not bring her back to them.

This is another slow-burning stick of dynamite hidden in the lengthy court ruling that also highlighted the panel of judges’ conclusion that the McCanns “have not been proved innocent” in their daughter’s disappearance (click here).

It is not that the UK media has ‘missed’ the damning clause - the Daily Mail did in 2007 reveal that Madeleine’s father did not agree with it - but rather that it appears for now to be choosing to ignore it.
A source working for a several tabloids has been in touch with the Resident to find out if the clause was highlighted by Portuguese papers.

He reiterated his opinion that “the tide in UK is changing”.

But it hasn’t stopped the rehashing of some very old stories as if they were new.

The Daily Star’s this (Thursday) morning reports that the TVI documentary in which Amaral expounds his ‘theory’ that Madeleine died in a tragic accident in the holiday apartment has “appeared on the Internet in English after the couple spent nine years trying to ban it”.

The story claims Madeleine’s parents are “considering legal action”.

Read more:
http://portugalresident.com/mccann-spokesman-admits-parents-%E2%80%9Csufficiently-realistic%E2%80%9D-to-admit-maddie-%E2%80%9Cprobably-dead%E2%80%9D

Clarence Mitchell: "McCanns 10th year Maddie anniversary interviews being organised by Scotland Yard"

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2876843/kate-gerry-mccann-cashing-in-anniversary-maddies-disappearance/

MADELEINE McCann’s parents have slammed claims they are plotting to make hundreds of thousands out of the 10th anniversary of their daughter’s disappearance.

The couple’s spokesman Clarence Mitchell shut down claims the couple are accepting huge fees for 10th anniversary media interviews.

He told The Sun Online: “They want to make it clear that they are not making any money out of Madeleine’s disappearance. Any claims are spurious nonsense but fits in with the Portuguese agenda.”
Kate and Gerry McCann, both 48, are bracing themselves for the heartbreaking milestone in less than three months and despite being bombarded with offers from across the world they have, so far, turned them all down.
As interest increases daily to clinch the sought-after decade deal by broadcasting and publishing giants, the family have admitted: “It’s crazy!”

Mitchell said: “Kate and Gerry have not decided on any media interviews surrounding the anniversary yet but if any deal is done it will be extremely limited and no payment will be involved.
“Any suggestion they will be paid is completely inaccurate and utter rubbish!”
Portuguese media have suggested former GP Kate and heart doctor Gerry, from Rothley, Leics., are set to receive 100,000 euros (£85,086) from British deals and 400,000 euros (£340,345) from American chats.

The couple are considering two pooled interviews in Britain, one for print through the country’s national agency Press Association and one for broadcasters.
Both are being organised through Scotland Yard, Mitchell explained. He said: “There will be no fee.”

The spokesman added: "The interest on the 10th anniversary has been vast, even crazy! Kate and Gerry have turned down down numerous offers of paid interviews in the past.
"But they have never accepted interview fees. They once accepted hospitality fees many years ago after travelling to America to appear on Oprah Winfrey, for flights and hotels.”
The only time Kate ever received any payment connected to Maddie’s disappearance in May 2007 - £1 million before tax – was from her own book simply entitled “Madeleine” and published in 2011.

She was also given a newspaper serialisation fee, which went straight into the Maddie pot – a Fund set up when the three-year-old first went missing with donations from the generous public and big-hearted celebrities to help pay for investigators to find her and bring her perpetrators to justice.
Madeleine McCann disappeared from a holiday villa in the Portuguese resort of Praia da Luz in May 2007.
The couple recently hit out at BBC1 drama The Moorside, which told the story of Shannon Matthews' abduction in 2008 - but repeatedly referenced Madeleine's disappearance.
A close friend of the couple said: “They are still doing the best they can while coping with the trauma of their daughter’s disappearance after nearly 10 years.
"Then a supposedly responsible broadcaster makes a programme about a bogus kidnap and brings Madeleine McCann into it. Kate and Gerry are naturally hurt and very perplexed."

CMOMM: http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t13577-sun-mccanns-slam-claims-they-are-cashing-in-on-anniversary-of-maddie-s-disappearance#356805

"Faking it - Tears of a Crime" - Will Kate and Gerry McCann want this Carter-Rucked too?

VIDEO Translated : Judges DESTROY McCanns - They should NOT be considered innocent! CMTV Rua Segura

CMTV Rua Segura Translated by Isabelle Maria McFadden
Host: Sara Carrilho

JUDGES DESTROY MCCANNS

They speak of “founded suspicions of a crime”
Portuguese Supreme Court destroys the parents of Madeleine McCann in accord where the court absolves Goncalo Amaral of indemnisation of 500k euros.
The document states that once the couple was made “Arguido” Suspect in a Criminal case the suspicions of crime are not discerned.(excused)
---------------------------------------------
Kate & Gerry McCann are destroyed in accord of the “Supremo Tribunal de Justica” where the ex coordinator of PJ is absolved from paying 500k euros to the girl’s parents who disappeared in May of 2007 in the Algarve.

In play the book “ Maddie The Truth of the lie” where Goncalo Amaral defends that the girl died in an accident and the body was hidden by the parent who then simulated an abduction.

The McCann Couple claim they were injured,the Judges responded as follows:
The Accused Goncalo Amaral expressed his opinion taking into account what in his opinion results from evidential means and indications collected during an open investigation, in virtue of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann on May 3rd, 2007

As a matter of fact, the accusers were themselves accused suspects in a criminal inquiry. Which implies founded suspicion of them having committed a crime or crimes

Kate & Gerry believe that the book is an attack on their honor and that it’s content results from the violation of professional secrecy on Goncalo Amaral’s part.

The counsel of Judges continue:
It is correct that the criminal inquiry ended up being archived, in virtue that none of the evidence that led to ruling McCanns as suspects being confirmed.However, even in the archiving report serious reservations are noted as to the likelihood of the allegation that Madeleine was abducted.
As far as the presumption of innocence invoked by the parents, the judges consider that it should NOT be said that the McCanns were considered innocent via the archival report of the Criminal Case

Such archival was determined by it not being possible of the “Ministerio Publico” to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the (recorrentes) McCanns

It does not seem acceptable for it to be considered that the said archival, founded on insufficiency of evidence , should be equivalent to comparison of Innocence.

The accord has 79 pages and it was posted on January 31st

MCCANNS 'GUTTED' (Daily Star 16 Feb 2017) - Legal attempt to try to remove TV show, uploaded to youtube April 2009, featuring Amaral from the internet...Carter-Ruck have been consulted

The McCanns are nearly 8 years late in trying to injunct this programme!
GETTY • PA
ACTION: Maddie McCann’s parents were last night considering legal action
The programme appeared on the internet in English after the couple spent nine years trying to ban it.

It was made in Portugal to accompany ex-detective Goncalo Amaral’s controversial book about the three-year-old’s 2007 disappearance.

In it Mr Amaral, 57, repeats claims about events in the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz.

Parents Kate and Gerry launched a legal bid for a lifelong gagging order on the show and book, and £1million in libel damages.

The couple, both 48, who believe their daughter was abducted and may still be alive, said his claim she was dead had hampered the search.

Both the programme and book were outlawed, and in 2015 Mr Amaral was ordered to pay them 500,000 euros (£430,000) in damages by a Portuguese judge.

But the award was overturned, and both the book and a DVD of the show are back in circulation.

The McCanns have been ordered to pay Mr Amaral’s legal costs, which could wipe out the fund set up to find their daughter.

He is said to be seeking a British publisher to release his book in the UK for the first time.

PH
TV SHOW: The programme appeared on the internet in English
Now the TV show has appeared on YouTube with an English voice-over.

Last night the McCanns’ lawyers, London libel specialists Carter-Ruck, were considering legal action.

The couple’s spokesman said: “Any potentially defamatory material found online will be reviewed and assessed by Kate and Gerry’s lawyers.”

During their legal battle against Mr Amaral one of the McCanns’ lawyers, Ricardo Correia Afonso, said in court: “His book is written like a novel and that’s exactly what it is.’’

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

Anyone can read Amaral's book in English here: http://goncaloamaraltruthofthelie.blogspot.co.uk/

And see the English voice-over programme they want banned, here:

This programme was uploaded to youtube on 30 April 2009. Which means the McCanns are nearly 8 years late in trying to injunct it.

KATIE HOPKINS: The McCanns hate Maddie being named in the same breath as Shannon Matthews. But were the two little girls really so very different?

KATIE HOPKINS: The McCanns hate Maddie being named in the same breath as Shannon Matthews. But were the two little girls really so very different? 

By Katie Hopkins for MailOnline

PUBLISHED: 15:40 GMT, 10 February 2017 | UPDATED: 16:42 GMT, 10 February 2017

It was only to be expected, I suppose.

Following the BBC dramatisation of the fake kidnap of Shannon Matthews, inevitably the first couple out of the gates for comment were the McCanns.

A source close to the family is said to have told the press the drama is appalling and insensitive.
Well here’s a new idea for the McCanns: this time it’s not all about you. This is not your story to tell.
This is about the tragic life of another little girl: Shannon. 

A little girl born into nothing, treated as nothing and finally freed to be something after her own mother was arrested.
This is the sort of neglect we associate with mums who cash in kids for benefits, like coupons in a store.
And here’s another new idea for Gerry and Kate: this coverage does not smell slightly strangely of roses. This is unsanitised, and it pongs a bit.
And that seems to be at the heart of the issue: the McCanns resent them and their parenting being spoken about in the same conversation as Karen Matthews.
Detectives think Matthews settled on the idea of kidnap after seeing how much money poured into the McCann fund and the amount of press attention Kate and Gerry received.
While publisising her daughter's disapearrence Matthews (pictured) used a random teddy taken from Shannon’s bed
It mimiced the Maddie Cuddle Cat that Kate (pictured) used to carry around with her
While publisising her daughter's disapearrence Matthews (pictured left) used a random teddy taken from Shannon’s bed to mimic the Maddie Cuddle Cat that Kate (pictured right) used to carry around with her
She even used a random teddy taken from Shannon’s bed to mimic the Maddie Cuddle Cat that Kate used to carry around with her.
Is that teddy her favourite? Probably, Karen said. Not quite ringing true.
Kate’s Cuddle Cat never quite rang true for me either. If someone took my lovely baby away, I would put Cuddle Cat under my pillow every night to be close to the baby I lost. Not wash its memories away.

Kate put it in the washing machine just days after Maddie vanished into the night.
Karen Matthews copied Kate McCann’s appeal almost word for word when she shed her crocodile tears for the press: 'I need her home. If anyone's got my beautiful princess, bring her home.’
Kate’s sentiments coming out of Karen’s mouth. Kate’s Cuddle Cat, Karen’s brown teddy. Kate and Karen. Matthews and McCann. Clear parallels being drawn.
It’s possible Karen was also influenced by an episode of Shameless, which featured a fake kidnap and aired a few weeks before Shannon was stuffed away, drugged, under a bed.
Karen Matthews had no shame. A complete absence of the stuff.
Her own sister says she taped plastic bags to her babies’ bottoms to save buying nappies.

Detectives say she had so many different relationships with so many different men that when the police built up a family tree it had more branches than Tescos, with 300 names on it.

This same absence of shame allowed her to sacrifice a daughter into the ‘keeping’ of a man whose own daughters had been taken into care after he allegedly made them watch him have sex with a prostitute.

However, I’m not sure the McCanns can so easily set themselves apart.

Would you choose to leave your children in the hands of the monster you know — or all alone and take your chance with the devil you don’t?

Which mother was more desperate: the one with nothing and no hope of ever having anything, or the one with friends waiting at the tapas bar by the pool?

The search for Maddie cost around £12 million. The hunt for Matthews around £3.2 million

What is clear is that in both cases the public has paid a price for these decisions. The search for Maddie cost around £12 million. The hunt for Matthews around £3.2 million.

Karen Matthews is clearly guilty of this huge waste. And has paid for it, to some extent, with four years in prison and a pretty uncertain future.

We are told she is now receiving death threats as a whole new generation has been appalled by this monster of a mother.

You might say, for Karen, justice has been served.But the matter of guilt or innocence is never far from the front door of the McCanns.

This week the Portuguese Supreme Court judges made clear that the archiving of the criminal case into Maddie’s disappearance did not mean Kate and Gerry were innocent. There is a significant and not merely a semantic difference, they said.

What does justice look like for the McCanns?

Perhaps we can agree Karen Matthews is a monster. But some kind of monsters came for Maddie at night. She was lost because she was left to be found. Shannon Matthews was born lost, and desperately needed to be found.

Shameless or desperate? The monster you know or the devil you don’t? Rich or poor? Better or worse? Justice or just deserts? These are hard calls to make.

Two very different families.

Two very different children yet, strangely, uncomfortably connected.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4212368/KATIE-HOPKINS-Madeleine-McCann-Shannon-Matthews-link.html#ixzz4YIpflaZ2

Only one complaint made to Ofcom...and we can guess who that was, can't we Kate?

CMTV Debate on the Supreme Court Ruling and the Maddie Case

https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2017/02/cmtv-debate-on-supreme-court-ruling-and.html

CMTV Debate on the Supreme Court Ruling and the Maddie Case

by Joana Morais 4 hrs ago

"Nonetheless, even in the archiving dispatch serious reservations are made about the verisimilitude (reality of)
of the allegation that Madeleine had been abducted."

Short debate on the Portuguese Supreme Court ruling and the Maddie case. Rua Segura is a daily TV show broadcast by CMTV, presented by Sara Carrilho, where criminal and current issues are debated and analysed. On this episode the program had as guests Carlos Anjos, former PJ inspector and former head of the Criminal Investigation Officers' Union and Manuel Rodrigues, former PJ Chief Inspector. The first two minutes are basically the same as the article published by Correio da Manhã "Judges demolish McCanns' innocence".

Sara Carrilho - Manuel Rodrigues, there isn't another way to say it, the Supreme Court of Justice was implacable (scathing, adamant) with the McCann couple.

Manuel Rodrigues - I have no idea what to call it, if implacable if something else. What I think, is that probably for the very first time in many years, the Supreme Court treated an issue that is a recurrent problem in criminal processes, in a remarkably clear manner and also educational. In other words, we have several people going around, freely, involved in criminal processes, in respect to the parents it wasn't possible, despite the numerous indications that were gathered, extremely varied of all sorts, to substantiate the evidence. And then there is the principle of in dubio pro reo (Lat. when in doubt, for the accused), so in those situations the Courts cannot convict, as such the criminal processes are archived. So we have, excuse my expression, plenty "caramelo" (cocky, brazen-faced), claiming they are innocent, knowing full well that they committed crimes, that they have stolen thousands if not millions, in short, committed crimes all types...

Carlos Anjos - Of all types, we all know they have committed those crimes.

Manuel Rodrigues - Exactly, everyone knows and they themselves know it too, but Justice doesn't work with assumptions. Justice works with substantiations of evidence and sometimes that is not possible. And it's not possible not because the investigation was poorly done, inadequately performed, defectively investigated, no! At times the complexities of criminal matters are to a such degree that despite the evidence, it's just not possible.

Sara Carrilho - In this particular case for example, there wasn't a reconstruction of the crime because there were no witnesses.

Manuel Rodrigues - That's where I wanted to go. Besides the Supreme Court very clear message when saying "Hold your horses. Just because the process was archived, no one said that you are innocent!", and this was said for the first time by someone with authority in Justice, clarifying and bringing this argument to a closure. In addition, they went beyond by saying that many of these problems would have been resolved, possibly the process (criminal case) would have had a conclusion, if only the lack of attendance of the witnesses hadn't scuppered an investigative step that was crucial and was never possible to do, and that was the reconstruction of the crime. That whole group involved in this situation, some of which who might eventually not be good characters, they all disappeared, they all got a ticket and got away. And when it was asked for them to comeback, because they were needed to do the reconstruction, no one came back. Now, everything has turned into a soap opera, but with few stars, with those that are not worthy of being followed, there are very unsavoury games in the midst of all this, there are protections that have never been explained. The media, in my opinion, never did a good job, or rather, failed in what was likely the most important thing to do during all this time, that was to verify the past of the group, understand the connections and the reasons behind the protections, the media has never got to the bottom of those issues. I do not want to go on for very much longer, except to say this: for me, this ruling by the Supreme Court is a piece that should be framed and should be displayed to the general populace.

Sara Carrilho - Wasn't that work made by the police? Of finding the background information of this group?

Manuel Rodrigues - We're making an error of appreciation on this issue. The police has to investigate this crime, and prove this crime. Obviously there were background checks of this group, evidently some conclusions were reached, conclusions which have already been widely mentioned, also in this program, the most diverse: that the group eventually engaged in swinging, others in cha-cha-chá, or another type of music, it doesn't matter. All these are parallel processes to the crime itself. It was also said that in that group there were people that were paedophiles, that had connections to...

Carlos Anjos - Secret Services.

Manuel Rodrigues - (nods affirmatively) So, all this should have been thoroughly scrutinized, instead of saying that Gonçalo Amaral ate grilled sardines or...

Carlos Anjos - That he drunk whisky, or whatever.

Manuel Rodrigues - This are fait divers (anecdotes) to cause noise and disturb the investigation, and sadly we have reached this point now where there is a child missing since 2007, and we still don't know precisely what happened to her.

Sara Carrilho - This year marks the ten years since her disappearance. In relation to this ruling, Carlos Anjos, the message that has been sent out is that the lack of evidence can never be equated to innocence.

Carlos Anjos - Of course, that happens in all processes, like Manuel said, there are many 'fine' people that think that when a process is archived because the crime wasn't proved... One thing is when the judges rule "the defendant is acquitted because he did not commit the crime", this is an exoneration but when they aren't convicted because the indicia didn't develop into sufficient proof for an accusation that doesn't mean an absolution. This is the reason why I agree with Manuel, this ruling is sublime, it's without any doubts one of the best legal pieces that I have read recently in terms of quality. Also in the way that presents the problems and explains them in a clear and easily understandable way. We have a case where a man was constituted as an arguido and didn't provide a statement, any man that has his child missing wouldn't care about giving statements (to the police), if my son disappeared I wouldn't care if they suspected me, they could even arrest me as long as they would find my child, it wouldn't be because they had suspicions that I would refuse to give a statement. There is one thing that we know by reading the statements of the whole group, is that they all lied, lied through their teeth, because there isn't a single statement between those 7 or 8 people that were there that night that matches with one another.

Sara Carrilho - And the only reconstruction done so far, was by CMTV that reveals those exact incongruences.

Carlos Anjos - Yes, when they went back to England they were questioned and again they had conflicting versions. When invited to come back, with paid expenses, none of them came back, not even the McCanns, the parents of the child. This reconstruction would have solved, one way or another, those questions. On top of that, they accused Gonçalo Amaral of breaching the professional secrecy, what breach of professional secrecy? When Gonçalo Amaral wrote the book the process was already in the public domain, it was no longer under judicial secrecy, and the CD's (containing a digital copy of the process) had already be given to numerous people.

Sara Carrilho - They themselves talked several times, the door had already been open.

Carlos Anjos - That is also another point, they accused Amaral of writing the book for profit, I am absolutely certain that Amaral would swap the earnings from his book for a single interview the McCanns gave throughout the world, namely when they went to Oprah. I'm sure he would swap it, and that would have solved all the problems of a life time. If there was someone in this case that profited, it's disputable to understand who that was, but if you ask me I think that Gonçalo Amaral when he wrote the book, he retired from the police to write the book, while we are still to this day talking about the money the McCanns will earn from the 10th anniversary interviews, because we are talking about their daughter, we are not talking about the daughter of Gonçalo Amaral. Therefore, there is a plan, which from an ethical standpoint, concerning the way they have used the child's disappearance is difficult to understand. Another thing, the McCanns have spoken substantially more about their daughter's disappearance without saying anything significant, they should have explained where they have spent the funds, everyone contributed the Maddie fund. Or even the English government - the protection Manuel was talking about earlier, why did they give 15 million euros to a single investigation, that is almost the operational budget of the Judiciary Police for one year. And England is the European country where more children go missing, children that don't have a tenth of what the English government has invested on this case. Despite everything, for the very first time in this process someone dotted the i's and crossed the t's, because what the McCanns wanted was a certificate that they were innocent and had nothing whatsoever to do with the case. This ruling tell us that the abduction theory is far-fetched.

Sara Carrilho - Ten years later what is certain is that we still don't know...

Carlos Anjos - Ten years later, at least some Justice was done, it was proved that the abduction of the child is highly unlikely.

Sara Carrilho - In relation to the whereabouts of the child, we still don't know where she is and ten years have passed.

Broadcast by CMTV, Rua Segura Se.17 EP.28 February 9, 2017

McCann V Amaral: Supreme Court verdict 31 Jan 2017

 

Many thanks to Anne Guedes who is translating the McCann V Amaral: Supreme Court verdict 31 Jan 2017

http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Supreme_Court_31_01_2017.htm#01