Lying in the Sun

Did Panicking Kate & Ger

 Did Panicking Kate and Gerry McCann…



                                Walk towards clinic/beach carrying an injured/dead Madeleine?  Or did one of the holiday group?


Which Door did Gerry enter the holiday apartment?


                                He gave two entirely different accounts to Portuguese Police – Why? 


                          Gerry has to come clean on this!



I don’t believe there are many, if any at all who believe that Kate and Gerry McCann killed their daughter, far from it. 


I don’t believe either that there are many, if any at all who believe the children were not well looked after at home in the UK. 


But when on holiday in Portugal in 2007 – things changed – the same care and protection these children had known at home was in the evenings at least, non- existent.


I say this based on what the McCann couple have told the world – that each and every evening they left the children, an almost 4 year old child and two, two year old's alone unsupervised, no responsible adult around to care for them, in a holiday apartment, which they say was locked on some nights but not on others.  A patio door left in a position whereby it could be slid open from the outside by anyone who chose to do so.  Likewise a child of an age that Madeleine was at the time could easily have opened it from the inside. 


Now that in itself makes not an ounce of sense.   Locking the apartment some nights, not others? 


Why would they do this? 


So, on some nights they thought ‘we had better lock up keep the children safe’ or rather, not safe, but locked inside.   Then on other nights, they decided not to bother locking the children inside. 


On night of 3rd May 2007 Madeleine was reported as missing.  On that very morning she had told her parents she and her baby brother were crying the previous evening in their absence.


Why then would the parents, any parents, decide to once again go out and leave three such young children after having been told what they had been, by their daughter?


Moreover, why would they decide to go out and leave the patio door unlocked, knowing their children had been awake the previous night, and knowing in the case of the McCanns, that Madeleine was prone to waking and wandering? 


It quite simply and quite frankly – does not add up. 


And it is interesting too, as in interview the couple speak of going to the apartment to do their ‘checks of the children’ by the ‘usual route.’ 


What was the usual route?  There can be no ‘usual route’ if they changed routine, from some nights locking up the apartment with the children inside, and on others, not doing so. 


For this alleged abductor to have monitored their movements in the days prior to this alleged abduction – it would have been very difficult for him/her to plan how to enter the apartment, never knowing which door would be left open or who would be coming back and forth, and not knowing which door those checking would use. 


And no abductor would choose to open a shutter and window which in the case of the McCann apartment was located at the front of the apartment buifling, right beside the front door. 


I say this, as the windows and front entrances to all of the apartments where the McCann holiday group resided were located at the same side of the building and next to each other. 


The only couple who did not check on their children as they had a monitor was the Payne couple.  The Payne’s too the only couple who were not allocated a ground floor apartment. 


The others, the Oldfield’s and Tanner/O’Brien their apartments were right next to the McCanns.


Out of these four companions, only Rachael Oldfield did not check on children the children on the night Madeleine vanished. 


The other three, Jane Tanner, Russell O’Brien and Matt Oldfield all claim to have checked, likewise, Gerry McCann and Kate McCann. 


Now that is a lot of people in a very short time all heading to the front entrances of the apartments. 

Oldfield who had never before this night checked the McCann children because he did not know them, did not know the McCanns well enough to do do- supposedly then did two checks.  One by listening at the shutter window at the front of the building, and one by entering the apartment at the other side of the building - the patio door side?

He also, not only checked on his own child entering by the front entrance, but he then popped in to the Tanner/O'Brien apartment to speak with O'Brien
who was already there checking his children.


Why would any alleged intruder – one who had been monitoring the movements of not only the McCann couple – this was a group of people, and anyone monitoring would have known this – so making their decision to enter the McCann apartment by the front entrance, rather dangerous with so many people to-ing and fro-ing,popping in and out of each others apartments, listening at shuttered windows -  then open the shuttered window of the McCann apartment located where Oldfield, Tanner, O'Brien, Gerry McCann and Kate McCann would be heading at any given time? (basing this on Gerry's FIRST statement to police)


A window open, would be seen instantly. 


And why would the alleged abductor choose the McCann apartment? 


If this alleged abductor wanted a little girl, their holiday companions, whose apartments were right beside the McCanns, had little girls too.  Little girls just like Madeleine? 

Madeleine too was in a creche all day.   The other children were not.

Arguably anyone watching the group would be able to monitor the children of the other families more than they could a McCann child.

And Madeleine was not in the same creche group as her baby brother and sister.

None of the creche staff reported anything unusual.

No scary lurkers would you believe!


It would seem highly unlikely that any would-be intruder who had stalked, monitored, planned, whatever you may wish to call it, the movements of the McCann holiday group, would be so foolish to even attempt to enter any of their apartments from that side of the building when so many of them were going back and forth. 


It would then leave the patio door entrance of the McCann apartment. 


But this patio door was on route to the front entrances.  Those checking the children had to pass this door, the little gate which led up to the patio door, on their way to the front entrances!


Hardly secluded from that aspect, everyone passing it! 


The McCann apartment, on both sides, front and side/back entrances, at any given time had people passing, and not just the holiday group, members of the public too, other holidaymakers – Jez Wilkins for one – who was out walking with his baby in the pram – yet he saw no ‘lurkers’ either.    


When Kate McCann arrived to do her check at 10pm she tells us all was well.   That is: 


The gate at the bottom of the stair was closed.

The gate at the top of the stair was closed.

The curtains which draped the patio doors were closed.

The Patio door was closed, but not locked – just as they had left it. 


If for talk sake some alleged abductor entered and exited by the patio door entrance (this though even more unlikely than the front door/window scenario) he was extremely tidy.  Taking time to close curtains, doors, gates/security gate? 


But the big question is, or one of them.   If this guy left by the patio entrance (known also as side/back patio entrance) which way did he head?   What was his route? 


Without knowing which of the McCann holiday group did what and when - and at this moment in time, that remains very unclear as their stories don’t add up – and without it being established which door in particular the McCanns, both Kate and Gerry McCann used on the night the child vanished then difficult for the police ANY police force to properly establish what became of Madeleine McCann.


You see, the McCanns claimed they would lock the patio door before leaving the children alone inside – the patio door could only be locked from inside - and then exit by the front door entrance, locking it after they did so. 


On returning they would quite naturally then, use the front door to gain entry and use their key to do so. 


Gerry McCann when first interviewed by the Portuguese Police told them that this is what he and his wife Kate McCann had done on the night Madeleine vanished. 


Both, on their separate checks had gone to the apartment, unlocked the front door, using their key and entered.


SEVEN days later he changed his story! 


Would you believe NEITHER of them on ‘DAY 7’ when he unveiled his new story to police - had entered the apartment by the front locked door using their key to open it - in this new version they had entered by an unlocked patio door! 


Now, I would say it is IMPOSSIBLE for McCann to have forgotten how he entered the apartment on that night. 


If we are all honest in this – How could he have?  He had only been at the tapas restaurant for half an hour, when he decided to go check.  Are we to believe in that half hour this cardiologist - who I imagine has a good memory, would need to have to carry out his work, else a whole lot of patients in the UK are in a whole lot of trouble if relying on him – forgot which door he used?


The abduction story is pretty far-fetched – most applying common sense can see this.   There is no evidence, not a shred to substantiate abduction! 


Is there a possibility of it – well of course there is – that is, but for the inconsistencies and lies - and there have been many told and that is the truth of matters whether some choose to acknowledge this fact or not – the holiday group have not been truthful in their accounts of that evening.


Unless the police can get answers as to why they, the holiday group have lied, particularly so in respect of the checking regime, the open/closed doors, the un/locked patio door, the window with only Kate McCanns fingerprints, prints, the position of which on the window indicate that she slid this window open, a window which she claimed was already open when she arrived – then the possibility of abduction becomes, well…pretty much, a story invented by them…


There have been lots of theories as to what happened to Madeleine.


If we keep it simple, as simple is usually what it is – any mystery surrounding this case I believe was created after the event – what happened to Madeleine, not a mystery - the police know - but a matter of establishing hammering out, with this group of people their movements and all else on that night.


Madeleine we know prone to waking and wandering.  McCanns themselves have stated that whilst on holiday the child came through to their room on occasion to wake them, to alert them to the crying of her younger brother and sister, Sean and Amelie, one or other, or both. 


An elderly lady who lived above the McCann apartment heard a child cry for over an hour on one evening.  A child crying out for her daddy!! 


The McCanns themselves, each on their separate checks of their children on the night Madeleine vanished stated that they thought the door to the bedroom was more widely open as Madeleine had got out of bed and gone to their room. 


So the parents are in agreement, it was not unusual for this child to be awake and wandering around.


So why are the McCanns so vehement that it was not possible for their daughter, on the night she vanished to have been wakened either by the crying of one of her siblings, or that she woke naturally, as it is clear quite often was the case?


Why are they so vehement that it was not possible for Madeleine to have slid open that patio door? 


Why did Kate McCann, according to her best friend Fiona Payne ask her opinion as to whether leaving the patio door unlocked was best for Madeleine, so that if she woke she could open it and go outside and search for her mummy and daddy? 


That is the story best friend Fiona gave as her police witness statement!


So very many lies told in this case by these people – Lies identified by the Portuguese Police and the Leicestershire Police – yet we still have people turning a blind eye to it.


By so doing they fail the missing child – by ignoring what is obvious, they fail her. 


None more so than Lorraine Kelly who makes the most ridiculous comments, clearly without any investigation, without becoming informed as to the details and facts of the case:


Kelly in 2009 after the McCanns appeared on the Oprah Winfrey Show: 


“Somewhere out there is a predator who kidnaps children and so far has managed to evade justice –not altogether surprising when you look at the Keystone Kop level of buffoonery and incompetence displayed by the police in Praia da Luz. 


Hopes lie with trying to identify a mysterious “ugly man” lurking around the resort just before Maddie disappeared.”




And how conspicuous her column has been, by the absence of any comment re the McCanns burying vital evidence!


Now that Lorraine, cannot be filed as ‘incompetence.’  Something, rather more worrying, something much more deliberate and evil! 


Suffice to say – the Little Lady Lorraine knows little of this case, else she would not make such silly comment.  


Hopes don’t lie with an ‘ugly man’ as Lorraine suggests – hope lies in the truthbut if she is not prepared to open her eyes and acknowledge the lies, the truth she will never see. 


The theory, of the Portuguese Police, of Dr Goncalo Amaral, is the most likely – that Madeleine had an accident in the apartment during a period when her parents were absent. 


One of the McCann party, Rachael Oldfield, stated if this had happened there were enough medics in the group to have assisted the child should she have needed to be resuscitated?


How true – but how true also – that resuscitation only helpful – when it is not too late…


Were the McCanns – too late?


Did Gerry McCann panic? 


An interesting article is one by Paulo Sargento a forensic psychologist where he speaks of Kate McCann, a possible suicide attempt (though her own psychologist was keen not to state that she ever was suicidal) he speaks of how ‘panic’ could result in the McCanns covering up a tragic accident, and of Dr Goncalo Amaral being removed from the Madeleine case. 


"The McCanns are 'forced' to search for their daughter"

 O Crime 


The interview with Oprah Winfrey analysed by a forensic psychologist

Paulo Sargento looks at the McCanns with clinical attention.


He understands the contradictions he identifies the signs of pressure that they are subject to. Innocent or guilty, they can't escape from the machine that has taken over their lives. 


 In reference to Kate McCann



<< Q. Do you think that when she "breaks", the case will be solved?


P.  Sargento:


Yes. I think this is about a sacrificial dilemma.


Imagine a scenario where there is, indeed, a terrible accident with Maddie.


The girl is found dead and the parents face a dilemma: let's assume this, we call the police and confirm that this was an accident, but we’ll have to justify the other two children, why they were alone until that time.


Especially because the couple wasn't aware of the fact that in Portugal they were not subject to the crime of exposure and abandonment (they would only be so in case of intent). They had been here for four days and it wasn't possible that they had had time to inform themselves.


Apart from that, they weren't sober. This has to be said, considering the consumption of bottles during dinner.


Therefore, they have to decide swiftly between concealing a reality, sacrificing one person for the benefit of their lives, their careers and the twins' lives.


In a cost/benefit relationship, the choice of the greater good for the greatest number is often made by human beings. Although it may be merely an impulsive, not thought out choice, it forces for a pact to be kept, so it can result for a greater number of people. 


And this, for me, is a likely vision of what happened that night.


Please note that all of us, under more or less dramatic circumstances, are faced with these sacrificial dilemmas. 


It just happens that in this case, the sacrifice is too big, and if it was done in this manner, it is a crime.

Q.  People ask: but if it was them, why do they continue searching?


P. Sargento:


I think they aren't searching for anything anymore, they are merely forced to keep up the media interest, they are "forced" to look for their daughter.


Faced with external pressure, they have to do something, or definitely the spell will turn against the sorcerer and the whole thing falls apart.


That's why I say that the couple are now subject to such pressure that it must cause them atrocious suffering, but they cannot escape anymore. This machine cannot stop anymore. And that is why, when Kate is more fragile, new things always appear.


The Advisor's 'Gaffe'


Clarence Mitchell, a former advisor to the English government, has been the controller of information in the "Maddie case".



P. Sargento:


The McCanns' advisor committed an unforgivable 'gaffe' during an interview with Sky News.


When he is told that a certain criminologist defended that Maddie's abduction had probably taken place in an unplanned manner; that Maddie had wandered out of the house looking for her parents and a paedophile had passed by at the time and took her, Mitchell says an interesting thing:


“That didn't happen, that's ludicrous, Kate knows it, she knows that didn't happen.” 


Now, what can we conclude from this? 


If she knows that didn't happen, does she know how it happened?


That's the first deduction. Why? 


We must admit that this theory dismantled another one that of the open window and Kate's fingerprints on the window. 


This leads us to think that there is always a cat hiding with its tail sticking out, that is to say, a set of contradictions that lead me to freely consider that Kate has in fact a serious emotional disturbance and that she tried to commit suicide.


Even more so, because parents in this kind of situation, who lose their children under serious circumstances, approximately 80% become depressed, and among those, an important part assumes characteristics of seriousness that lead them to try suicide, or even to commit suicide. Therefore, the interpretation is parsimonious although speculative, but it is not as far from context as one may think.


"Gonçalo Amaral was removed because he 'pressured' Kate"


"There were many people saying that Gerry McCann was to become a Secretary of State for Health in the English government. That might explain something, but one must also look at the close relationship with Prime Minister Gordon Brown's brother.


There is no doubt that Gonçalo Amaral was not 'marked' on the day that he made that statement. Others said much worse. As a matter of fact, the aberration is how Dr Alípio Ribeiro keeps his post when he publicly assumes that the constitution of the McCanns as arguidos was precipitated.


Gonçalo Amaral was removed because right on the first day, he started 'pressuring' Kate. And soon after, the ambassador arrived with a PJ top officer – I'm not going to say who that was – and nobody else is questioned on location.


Gonçalo Amaral is 'marked' right away.   The couple may have had nothing to do with their daughter's disappearance, but they must be hiding something very important to justify this kind of interference." >> 


And that is the crux of Madeleine’s disappearance –  the majority do not believe that the McCanns killed their daughter, but what from what they can see, and clearly so, is that the group lied, and that  lying was to cover up something – something serious – as now retired British Detective John Stalker said – this group of people are hiding something.


The Leicestershire Police and the Portuguese Police reached this same conclusion.


Shall we all simply as Lorraine Kelly has done, label all professional people those who are not looking for her ‘Mr Ugly’ those who have serious and indeed founded doubts as to the story told by the McCanns, as buffoons and incompetents?

Or will we look closer at the facts, at the untrue stories told, and fight for justice for Madeleine, and speak out  for all those like the poor fellow in Portugal whose family has to suffer because this holiday group will not stand up and be counted.  Cannot find it in their conscience to tell the truth.


Time to waken up little lady – the McCanns most likely did not kill their daughter, I don’t believe they did – but they most obviously have lied continuously!


And until Lorraine Kelly or anyone else can tell us why – tell us why Gerry McCann changed his story, and did not report this change of story until SEVEN DAYS AFTER Madeleine vanished – in so doing hindering a police investigation and until we know why their holiday companions lied also, and why the McCanns concealed from police authorities both in Portugal and in the UK vital information AND E. Fits of a man carrying a child on the night Madeleine vanished, evidence which could have helped discover the whereabouts of their missing daughter – then and only then will justice for Madeleine McCann be in sight!
3rd November 2013

Website Builder