Life Savings
Undying hope for Madeleine
McCann
Scotland Yard has new leads,
and 38 new ‘persons of interest’ in the case of the missing child
by Leah McLaren on Friday, July 12, 2013
9:50am
http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/07/12/undying-hope-2/
In response to the
above:
Each of
us entitled to our opinion on this case (though Kate and Gerry McCann do not
appear to share that view - hence their reason for employing Carter Ruck at
huge cost to the Madeleine Fund, monies donated for the child, NOT for their
parents to squander and that has happened on more than one occasion) so I have
not a problem with the writer's view.
I do however have a problem with the content of the article factually it is wrong
in many areas.
Most of it is simply repeating the inaccuracies which have appeared in the
press of late, but perhaps the most glaringly obvious error is:
"They have devoted the past six years of their lives, as well as THEIR LIFE SAVINGS, to a relentless—and
often UNAIDED AND LONELY—search for
their daughter.”
Unaided, and lonely?
Donated their life savings?
Perhaps check out the reason why the Fund had to be 'tightened up' - a little matter of their mortgage being paid from
it in the very early days. No life savings at that time?
Their family said they had no personal funds. Nothing wrong in that, many of us
in fact, most of us I’ll wager, don't have - but please get it right.
They may not have had the cash as in personal funds to help find their child/discover
her whereabouts/discover what became of her, but cash was not going to find
her. Special funding is not a
requirement to trace a missing person the police are! And the Portuguese Police did a damn good
job of investigating what did become of the child – though not to the liking of
a certain some…
Assisting
fully the police investigation would
have been the BEST way to help
Madeleine, to help this poor child but they refused to fully co-operate. When
they did "co-operate" it was to give conflicting accounts of the
night the child vanished, Gerry McCann in particular, changing his story! And
perhaps his trousers too!
Please do not make martyrs of people who neglected their children in such a
heinous way.
People who
have been less than helpful to the police investigation in Portugal, to a
mother who refused to answer when questioned by police. It was her legal right to refuse, but let us call
a spade a spade - What kind of parent refuses to help an investigation
attempting to discover what became of their missing child? What kind of mother behaves, liked a spoiled
selfish brat throwing a right royal strop putting herself before her missing child who she and her husband
claimed was abducted and being held by
paedophiles? A ‘guilty one’ I’ll
bet the answer on the lips of most!
Guilty
of what though?
That
has yet to be discovered. But for sure,
when someone does not tell the truth, when they change their stories, suddenly
have loss of memory when questioned on important and relevant issues, become
evasive, bad mouth police officers, people too who went out of their way also
to help, do likewise with witnesses, ‘lawyer up’ to the hilt, both in the UK and Portugal, extradition
lawyers, libel lawyers and the rest at an enormous cost – sums of money the
McCanns would never have seen in their lives had Madeleine not mysteriously
vanished – alarm bells ring – and for those who still six years on do not hear
them I might suggest that they get their ears syringed!
For
those who deliberately refuse to hear/see and more importantly refuse to speak
out and question – shame on you!
Their
less than truthful accounts, discrepancies, changes to their stories are all
recorded and evidenced in their televised interviews, police witness
statements, Kate McCanns book, and the diary is a real eye opener…
Please
do not announce their innocence when the Met have not proven or solved this
case, when the Portuguese Police have primacy and always will, when the
Portuguese findings are not as those of the Met according to Andy Redwood, and
when in fact Andy Redwood has stated he may not be able to solve this case but
he will come up with ‘some sort of’
resolution.
Andy Redwood, may have stated he does not suspect them the Leicestershire Police and the Portuguese do not appear to be quite of the same opinion.
We all understand 'innocent until proven guilty' that the McCanns and or others the 38 included do not need to prove their innocence in the UK unless they are charged and are appearing in a Court of Law to defend those charges.
Equally, without absolute proof we cannot rule anyone out. Has Redwood got that proof to rule out those he said are not suspects?
To not be a suspect at any given point in time we must remember does not necessarily point to absolute innocence of the McCanns (or anyone else).
Just as the McCanns had suspect status at a certain point in Portugal, did not necessarily indicate their absolute guilt.
Redwood did not say the McCanns or their companions were innocent - he said they were not suspects.
Suspect status can change at any point. The McCanns have experienced this and may do so again.
Until they are found guilty of crimes against the child they can waltz around as they have been doing for quite some time now, like Lord and Lady Muck, and until Yacht Man has been found guilty, he too can continue to sail the seven seas telling everyone he is Captain Birdseye if he so wishes!
A thought which crossed my mind (and putting the new investigation to one side as we all know that has not begun and may not do for a very long time) but the current Review did the McCanns know from the beginning that it would take so long. Did anyone know that it would?
You see the McCanns were so very impatient with the Portuguese yet time seems not to matter any more? There appears to be no urgency.
The Met are but 2/3 of the way through it, it has taken them 1 year for each 1/3, so on that basis, another year to complete the final 1/3.
Pardon my lack of knowledge in this regard but is it normal for a Review of a case to take so very much longer than the initial investigation? Is it more difficult a process for a review team than it is for the original investigation team? Obviously I am generalising somewhat and every case will be different, but I am curious as I know, I for one somehow never imagined a Review would take such a lengthy time - perhaps I am now attuned to 'Cold Case' where all is solved and revealed in a 55 minute time slot!
But back on track -
What sort of resolution is Andy Redwood suggesting might make this case go away?
The
sort that had it “resolved” before it began – his instruction to bury it? Perhaps!
He may
at this point in time not consider them suspects then again he just might, but is
choosing not to provide that information to the press.
Did he
not state he would not divulge too much? Whether he is being truthful in this,
guarded or whatever you may like to call it, we cannot tell for sure.
He has
for someone being ‘guarded’ however, allowed the latest stories of the 38, into
the arena, the ‘couple’ newly rich who purchased a yacht, into the arena, why
would he do so if he was trying to keep information under wraps? Why would he do so if this information was sensitive? Sounds too silly to be that though!
Is this
just a red herring – must ask Kate McCann – she has an Honours Degree from
Fishy University, located in Makebelieve -
Sea bass her specialist subject!
Redwood
in my opinion, could not possibly have reconciled the many lies and
inconsistencies in the statements given by the McCann party, difficult then to
see how they can be ruled out of anything, of having not played a part, or NOT
KNOWING what became of the child, or at the very least not knowing what the
truth is as to the checking system on that night and on others, especially
regarding the Penn Jillette patio door, the magic one – now it’s open, now it’s not!. Difficult too, to see how the Metropolitan
Police could be that far off the mark, so far from the original investigation
in Portugal? That they have not sniffed
out that the cadaver dogs had something very relevant to tell them. That unless there was a ‘fire sale’ of the
type of trousers Gerry ‘Buttons’ McCann owns and unless he allowed a friend to
borrow his, he may just be the person the Smith family saw? They saw a man who looked like McCann wearing
trousers just like his, carrying a little girl, just like his daughter
Madeleine! Perhaps the alleged abductor
had time not only to clean the apartment but to dress in Gerry’s clothing, put
Madeleine on the yacht and return the garment?
Perhaps
one of Gerry’s holiday companions, one who is not dissimilar physically to him,
more so on a dark night, tried on Gerry’s pants for size…
The
ever changing stories by McCanns are for a reason of that we can be sure of,
and they were not designed to help Madeleine, I would say to ‘throw’ the
investigation.
The
McCanns though, like the 38 reported are ALL innocent until proven guilty.
But why
is it necessary to interview 38 when we have this ‘kind couple?’
At the
end of the day, it is not Andy Redwood who will decide the innocence or guilt
of anyone involved in this case – it is truth!
But will the truth be allowed to be heard? That is the real issue. The real concern of the majority!
A
problem I understand the Portuguese faced.
Some
can stifle or bury the truth, do all in their power to prevent the truth
surfacing, and arguably there have been robust attempts to do exactly that in
the Madeleine case, and by key players.
Even the Metropolitan Police, are not free of corruption their record as
we all know, not squeaky clean, but we can only hope that for Madeleine that
will not be the case and justice, true justice will be served. That Andy Redwood and his team are doing
things as they should be done.
The
McCanns are not openly jumping for joy at recent reports that Madeleine may be
alive. I suggest that is because they (like
Redwood and his team too) know that she is not!
If they
the McCanns truly believed this child was alive, and then discovered, after
Redwood announced his ‘full blown’ investigation, that
1.
The CPS had not as yet gotten
round to dealing with it, that is, dealing with, drawing up the complex legal
paperwork required, the first step to enable this to happen, and then to
discover that Redwood has said he probably won’t solve the case, but will
merely attempt to come up with some sort
of resolution –
2.
It will quite likely take
many months to interview these people, the 38 (one now dead, only 37 to go –
they might all have ‘passed’ before the paperwork is!)
3.
Their daughter may possibly be alive, living with a now rich
British couple who floated her away on their yacht, yet they will have to wait
months and months before anyone will do anything?
Would
this not anger them? Much less, had them
doing daft dog dances in temper bouts when
in Portugal!
Surely
the McCanns themselves armed with the information, which Redwood said he
regularly updates them on, would launch their own investigation go out there
and find her…but no! Seems to be no
urgency!
Perhaps
then they should now consider donating the fund monies to another cause, a
worthy one if the monies are just laying around – are they, just laying around? Is there anything left in that Fund at this
time to lay around?
Why are
they happy to sit around and wait, when Madeleine we are told could be within
touching distance so to speak, living with this rich British couple? Are they in UK just now?
Would
you, as the parent of a missing child, having this information on the nice rich
couple, who you had the name and details of, and a fat Fund with £hundreds
thousands, just sit and wait for the Metropolitan Police to get round to
interviewing them or would you take some action? The best lead you have got, your daughter is
with the couple, and you are happy to sit around for many months and do
nothing?
Not
forgetting in this scenario both you and the police have known about this couple
for TWO YEARS already!
Just
would not happen.
And why
is Redwood - if he believes a couple, has taken Madeleine to raise as their own saying she is possibly
alive? Does he think they may have killed her now that they know he is on to them?
You see
it just gets dafter!
If you
were told by the police that your daughter was dead and the police have a lead
on the culprit, you may do as the McCanns are doing now - sitting around having
absolute faith that he
will be caught!
Just as
you would have absolute
faith, too if you were re-assured that the real story will be buried
because for some reason that is what you need to happen!
Is this
case really so complex as it is being made out to be, or just corrupt to the
core?
Should
we be taking all that Redwood has said on board and believing it, or should we
be listening to what has not been said?
Redwood’s
“update” for the public told us nothing,
other than to inform us that the number of suspects had shot up in a
matter of only weeks from ‘around 20’ to an astonishing 38! But of the 38 – suspects he further stated
he ‘would not go so far as to refer to them as suspects as such’
I
wonder, does he have even half of the type of information on any one of them,
suspicions, circumstantial evidence as there clearly appears to be in those
police files concerning the McCann party, certainly enough for serious
questions to be asked of them?
Was the
purpose of this exercise not to tell us inform us of the “suspects” but more to
tell us that the McCanns and their companions are not suspects?
He
could hardly have a press conference to tell us simply that the McCanns had
been ruled out of his inquiries, without having someone else to, ‘fill their
shoes’ shall we say, none better so as to keep Madeleine “alive” also, than a
kindly and rich British couple, caring for her.
To keep her "alive" it would not do to have the culprit a swarthy looking Portuguese paedophile.
This
too was not simply a press conference to announce the ‘new suspects’ this was
carefully planned, drip drip effect over a couple of weeks, the Met leaking
information to press. Gerry McCann back
in April/May slipping in, when interviewed by Lorraine Kelly, that the Met
would soon be ‘asking’ for public assistance.
But Redwood doesn’t need the assistance of the public, he has his rich
couple, who he must know who and where they are. Who he must know if they have been raising
Madeleine as their own or if they have killed her?
So what
is it really all about, do we give the Metropolitan Police for now ‘some sort of’ benefit
of the doubt, as something tells me there is a possibility that Clarence
stating the McCanns will not be giving us a ‘running commentary’ on this case
is more due to them knowing about as much as we do rather, than them staying
schtum due to operational reasons!
Then
again, the Met have known of the couple for TWO YEARS and did nothing!
Neither
did the McCanns!
Or, the
McCanns might be saying nothing because it suits them to, they might be
thinking – Met have played their part, made an announcement that we are not being
investigated, nor are our friends, no need to say more – job done!
My late
great aunt Nellie a lady of the law would have found such amusement – persons
who, though not according to Andy Redwood (who may I remind us all, has not
solved the case) remain potential suspects in some quarters, not speaking out due to operational reasons
indeed! Tail wagging the dog! 'Ideas above their station' I can hear her say! Mitchell would have been a tremendous source of amusement to her!
Pity ‘operational
reasons’ didn’t hush Kate McCann, prevent her writing her bookie, so much pain
she poured on the public – hospitals were inundated…the ER could not cope I
heard - ‘split sides’ - never so many cases of this had they dealt with, folks had
laughed so hard – who would have thought so much damage could have been caused
by Kate’s pen, that piece of …sh...oh
what’s the word…oh yes – ‘evidence’ I think it was Goncalo Amaral made in
reference to it – yes, that it may one day be used in evidence!
Does
the Met have a copy of ‘Madeleine’ I wonder?
Perhaps
like that first week, they are busy doing other stuff, ‘perhaps not physically
searching’ as Kate might say, but keeping extremely busy and this is why for
the past two years, since discovering the existence of the kindly comforting
couple, they have not been searching the length and breadth of the UK for this mystery
pair who took their daughter?
And
would it not be interesting to look back over the past two years at any
interview the McCanns have given, to see if in any way they reflect that they
knew of this couple hmm? Redwood did say
they have been kept 'informed’ from the beginning that he has been in
regular contact with them!
Their
loyal supporters however I am sure, as I speak are out there, doing just that, torches
at the ready to shine in the eye of any unsuspecting 10 year old female child,
checking for eye defects, searching for homes where there are yachts parked on
sidewalks or moored in lakes which flow along at the bottom of back gardens,
where parents are dining out. But they
will have to be quick, it is 5.30 pm now UK families will be in a frenzy
preparing children for bed shortly, the dining in the back garden to commence,
for parents only - a restricted area, not child friendly!
And
would Redwood/Metropolitan if there was a rich couple who took Madeleine really
announce this to the world, not forgetting that the rich couple would get to
know too? It is all too silly.
Mitchell’s
announcement that the McCanns have absolute
faith is on the face of things quite astonishing!
What an
extraordinary response by the parents of a missing child on hearing that:
Perhaps
Clarence misunderstood, the paperwork has not been set in motion yet?
The CPS (Crown Prosecution Service) said they
didn’t get much notice. Would this be
same CPS which was in Portugal back in April?
How much notice did they need?
That
sets alarm bells ringing too!
Unaided
and lonely?
The
past six years have been like a circus hardly lonely and unaided, more people
in and out of this case than in and out of 5A, all making big bucks out of
missing Madeleine. More people dipping in and out of the Madeleine Fund too than one could shake a stick at, their Board of Directors like the British weather ever changing.
Gerry
McCann the Ringmaster cracking the whip Clarence Mitchell the juggler trying to
keep too many balls in the air and often dropping them – clangers! David Cameron the clown ‘dopey faced’ doing
Gerry’s bidding – yes Gerry, no Gerry, three bags full Gerry, I’ll get my ‘man
bag’ now Gerry, the special monies for special people like you Gerry are
inside, bought it from ‘FarFetch’ would you believe that Gerry a store called
Farfetch?
Andy
Redwood, well jury still out on him still time to redeem himself turn this
around if he is on wrong track, or for the truth of what is really going on
with these latest reports to come to light, hopefully soon, as, as they stand,
they are making little sense - and of
course Kate McCann the star of the show - her spangles glittering in the spotlight, the trapeze artist flying
through the air, swing to swing, as she makes contact with one, twisting
turning, quickly changing direction just as she has throughout this case, as
she has in her book, her diary her interviews, twists and turns, changes
direction, but somehow she has managed not to fall…she has tripped up but not
as yet come crashing down.
This
past week or so, much being put out there by Met with the press having a field
day, who knows what is actually going on, perhaps Kate’s ‘safety net’ is
about to be whooshed away like those curtains in the bedroom at 5A?
Perhaps
Gerry McCann will remember, erm remember…erm remember, oh yeh everything that
happened on that night. Perhaps he will
recall opening that front door with his key – it is after all quite possible –
did not Tanner after a period of time remember that the man she claims to have
seen, was not bald after all but had a glorious head of long flowing locks…So
no reason why Gerry too could not have a flashback involving ‘locks!
Clarence
dropped another ball telling us that Kate and Gerry won’t be giving us a
running commentary on what is now happening – Perhaps because they too, like
us, are just not sure what the Metropolitan Police are up to?
Then
again perhaps it is all to help the McCanns with the upcoming libel trial?
What do
they need to happen most – aside Madeleine arriving home before it takes place?
Would
something like that go a long way to help them?
Would
adding to this –
‘Oh and
we think she is with this nice couple that the Metropolitan Police think may
have her’ would that help too?
And would
it help also that the Metropolitan Police, the CPS won’t be able to do anything
to back up their suggestions and theories until perhaps AFTER the libel trial,
but as long as those suggestions and theories have been put out there, the seed
planted in the minds of the public, are on record?
The
recent announcement and leaks by the Metropolitan Police served no purpose at
this point in time that one can tell, if the legal paperwork to allow them to further progress in
any way this case has not been obtained.
The public did not need to know this.
So why?
If they
really do have this mystery couple lined up as targets, then it served no
purpose to alert the public make them and their pet parrots privy to this what
must be sensitive information.
And if
they truly have information such as this, credible as they are making out, then
should this not have been taken to the Portuguese to allow them to analysis it
and re-open this case if it was so credible?
Get this ball rolling immediately, rather than have the CPS pad around
dithering as to when they might get round to getting it off the ground?
And,
should it not have been taken to the Portuguese Police - TWO YEARS AGO?
So what
is really going on with Redwood? So many
more questions now than ever before!
If the purpose of this latest was aimed at quietening down matters regarding this
case, to take the heat from the McCanns, then it has failed big time - now
more so than ever, the public want answers, they want to know, not of mystery
kindly comforting couples, who have been
kept a secret for TWO YEARS (why no mention of them at last year’s Met
conference? Too soon, not planned for
release until now?) The public want to know how the Metropolitan Police
reconciled the statements given to the Portuguese Police, the Leicestershire
Police in the UK by the McCanns, and their holiday companions?
They
want explanations as to why this group told the story of their child checking
system, when it obviously did not happen!
Why they said the windows and shutter were jemmied when it was not? That and very much more, why did they tell
police both in Portugal and the UK such stories?
Redwood was poker faced barely flinched when delivering his speech,when answering the pre-prepared questions. Part of the job, the training maybe?
But noticeably even when delivering what should to him surely have been the good news - his telling us that the McCanns and their companions not being suspects in their daughter's death/disappearance - - what should have elicited even the tiniest of smile, the tiniest show of emotion, an indication that he was pleased for them just did not happen?
Should we therefore be thinking 'outside the box' thinking about what Redwood didn't say, and didn't do? And ask why?
The
opinion, views, theories of the writer of above article are as valid as that of
anyone else, if they want to hail the McCann couple as heinous or hero that is
their choice, but when it comes to incorrect reporting albeit perhaps unintentional,
of what is being put forward as factual, just please before putting pen to
paper, check it out, and if still you get it wrong, as often I do – apologise,
correct and acknowledge the error please.
Thank
you.
l-azzeri-lies-in-the-sun.com
14th July 2013