Lying in the Sun

What's Cooking?

What’s Cooking? 


Express Waffles        


You will need:

Large mixing bowl

Strong handled wooden spoon (vigorous mixing required)

Latest 40 hole Murray Waffle Maker


A dash of truth

A large dollop of ambiguity

A generous helping of brown stuff

Preparation Method

Simply stir and stir and stir - and serve!

Serving suggestions

Take with proverbial pinch of salt!

James Murray, Express has  as we know  written quite a number of unreliable articles on the McCann case, though not quite on the scale, or in the same league as the now infamous stories by  H.R.H of Hinky at the Sun!

There did however come a turning point when his articles became a little less unfavourable to the Portuguese Police, a little less one sided, where he slipped in a few comments, which without question will have ruffled the feathers of Team McCann.

How much was the Express ordered by Court to pay out to McCanns, and what  is the Express up to with their latest offerings by Murray?

Rather depends if we believe Express would seek revenge for their financial loss – A few sensational headlines to boost sales?  Financial side sorted, icing on cake if the double whammy waffle, hacks off/worries the supercilious Gerry McCann in the process?  And worry he might! 


If we believe that Murray is up to his old tricks where he writes ambiguous, untruthful articles in support of the McCann abduction theory for which there is not a shred of evidence.

So what was his agenda? 

Two ways of interpreting this tale of his – ‘Mystery couple seen going into McCanns flat on night before sobbing Madeleine disappeared’ – (One I demonstrated in ‘Murray Menace to McCanns’- of how easily his report could be taken to mean or spun to mean that he was highlighting the neglect of the McCann children.)

We know that the McCann children were left alone night after night, their parents failing in their duty of care to protect the children, throwing all caution to the wind having made the conscious decision to leave them without adult supervision. A choice they made.  Not a mistake as those who support this action insist on describing it.

The McCanns cannot support those who  suggest they made a mistake as they themselves are more than adamant they did NOT make any mistake regarding the children being left on their own.

How could they agree it was a mistake, and at the same time declare what they did was right, as in  'within the bounds of responsible parenting?'

If it ever reached Court, they need to be able to argue that they acted in a 'responsible' way, that is their defence - not that they made a mistake.   Gerry and Kate are not I would imagine, planning to throw themselves on the mercy of the Court.

This is why they choose their words carefully when speaking of their actions.

 'They regret not being there at that 'moment' when Madeleine was taken.'   'They feel guilty that someone took the 'opportunity.'

Gerry McCann:  

"We've talked about how guilty we feel that SOMEONE saw this as an opportunity."

(Saw what as an opportunity Gerry - your neglect of your children?)

McCann is not saying he/they are feeling guilty about what THEY did to their children.  But 'guilty' about what he claims others did to their children to Madeleine!

It is though a rather odd thing to say.   Any other parent in this situtation  would say that they were feeling as guilty as hell, full of remorse for what they had done to their children, that they would never forgive themselves their actions.

Not Gerry!   He's thinking - possible charges for child neglect/child abandonment/Court case.   No way is he going to admit what he did was wrong... His first thoughts - legal advice and representation!

Those who insist the McCanns made a mistake when they abandoned their kids five nights on trot, if you want to continue to show your support of their actions, you're gonna have to drop the use of 'mistake' get off that particular train at the next station and get on board the McCann truth train -   they acted within the bounds of responsible parenting.

Say it enough times and you might just begin to believe it!


  24.30 mins

1.    By reporting as he did, Murray revealed the extent of the neglectful behaviour of Gerry and Kate McCann.  By bringing to public attention details of persons, who it is claimed, entered the McCann apartment to go to the aid of the distraught McCann children, and in so doing he made it known also that the McCann children were not alone only on the night Madeleine vanished but on other nights also. 

It clearly shows that the children were alone upset and crying on the night of 1st May 2007.  The night of the 2nd May 2007, and that Madeleine on the night of the 3rd May 2007 when she was reported as missing was most likely awake and crying yet again. 

And that will not go down well if they ever have cause to defend child abandonment charges brought against them in a Court of Law. 

Whether charges would ever be brought against them now, or even if in Portuguese Law after such a length of time this would still be possible, I would not know - really doesn't matter - In the early days it was crucial that they stick to 'within the bounds of responsible parenting as the threat of being charged with crimes against their children loomed over them.  Now it may not be of such concern to them.  What remains important to them is the Fund, to promote it, to generate donations, and for that they have to appear squeaky clean.   And if that means continuing with 'we did not make a mistake' that is what they will do.

Murray's Mystery Couple Story, intentional or not, does however not paint a picture of the McCann parents acting within the bounds of responsible parenting.   How can it, when they the McCanns were out wining and dining with friends, their children alone, crying distressed, strangers entering their unlocked apartment to aid their children?

The parents both doctors!  Wow!

Is it that the Express perhaps do not support the McCann tale of abduction for which there is no evidence?  Murray's words may suggest this to some. 

To have included the witness statement of Mrs Fenn in his piece, brought it to public attention, not what is usual of the UK press.  

Those who follow the case are familiar with the Fenn statement, and the fact that these children were left alone on 5 consecutive nights, but the wider public are not.  It is spoken about on forums but never do the press in the UK report either, the extent of the neglect, the suffering and distress the McCann children experienced according to witnesses nor do they dare speak of the witness Mrs Fenn stating that she heard a child in the McCann apartment cry, call out for her daddy for a very lengthy period of time, over an hour.  It was not babies crying she had said, but an older child - Madeleine.


2.   The Express may just be playing the game, dancing to their tune, providing a story, of a kindly couple, who entered the apartment to comfort the McCann children, to show that it was possible for  someone to have entered in the absence of the parents -  to help bolster Kate McCanns suggestion – that a stranger had gone into the apartment on the night prior to Madeleine being reported as missing, and had frightened her children,and that that same person had returned the following night to abduct Madeleine.

But let’s try and unscramble what Murray has said.  Separate his ingredients.


Dash of Truth

It is already known that Pamela Fenn, who lived directly above apartment 5a, heard a child, believed to be Madeleine, crying for about an hour on evening of May 2nd.

She was so concerned she rang a friend in the village to ask what to do and considered ringing Portugal’s Policia Judiciaria.

***It must be noted Mrs Fenn heard crying from the McCann holiday apartment for over an hour on the night of the 1st May 2007, not the 2nd May 2007.   Madeleine was reported as missing late evening of the 3rd May 2007. ***

There is no reason to believe that this elderly lady would invent such a story.  Why would she?  

Kate and Gerry McCann insist the elderly witness could not have heard their children cry!

At the time, Madeleine’s mother Kate and father Gerry were dining with friends at a tapas bar some 50 yards from the apartment.

*** 50 yards was as the crow flies!  Tapas bar where McCanns were dining was in fact around 120 yards from their apartment.

To reach it involved a walk from their apartment to the entrance of the Ocean Club reception.  To then pass through the reception area out to a patio close to swimming pool before arriving at the tapas bar.  From this bar they did NOT have a clear view of their apartment***

Pamela Fenn has since died.

Sadly Mrs Fenn has passed away.


A Dollop of Ambiguity

SCOTLAND YARD detectives are trying to find a middle-aged couple said to have entered Madeleine McCann’s holiday apartment to comfort her because she was crying, we can reveal today.

(Let’s call them ‘Couple Number 1’- Witnesses 1 and 2 – The Mystery Couple)

The tip-off was given by two key witnesses who were re-interviewed as part of the Yard’s two-year, £4.5million investigation.

(Are these two ‘KEY’ witnesses part of a couple also, or two independent witnesses? It’s not clear. But let us call them Couple Number 2 - Witnesses 3 and 4)

A source said: “Police were astonished when this new information came to light. Officers spoke to other key witnesses to discover more about the middle-aged couple.

(Let us call the collective ‘others’ no matter their number - Witness number 5)

“Apparently they were concerned about the crying and went to see if they could comfort the girl.”

(This statement is in reference to Witnesses 1 and 2 – The Mystery Couple)

WE can confirm that a couple staying in the same block as apartment 5a were interviewed last February.
They were in their apartment on the night Madeleine vanished. Afterwards they wrote an account of what they saw but were never formally interviewed by Portuguese detectives.

They had been at a restaurant earlier in the evening and left at about 9pm.

(Couple Number 3 – Witnesses 6 and 7 – The couple Moyes?) 


So what do we have?

(a)  Couple Number 1 – Witnesses 1 and 2 – The Mystery Couple, yet to be traced (Arguably key witnesses)

(b)  Couple Number 2 – Witnesses 3 and 4 – The unnamed KEY witnesses who told police about the Mystery Couple – (I might add they appear to be more of a mystery than the Mystery Couple themselves)

(c)  Collective Others -   Witness 5                  (More un-named KEY witnesses)

(d)  Couple Number 3 – Witnesses 6 and 7 – The Moyes couple.

On the face of things I think we can easily narrow down Murray’s ambiguous mess to ONE couple, Couple Number 3 – the Moyes’ and say that his story is about them what they have to say and not about any mystery couple, or any un-named couple giving police tip-offs.

I suggest that neither exist!

Murray threw too much into his mix for any of it to make any sense!  Deliberately he took bits and pieces from varies recent press reports, put them together in such a way to cause confusion, to mislead the reader, to leave us scratching our heads…

Murray does not say that it is the police who gave him this information.  It was a “source.”   Unless he comes up with a quote from a Met officer, a named officer, and the name of the source, his statements are not fit for purpose.

Do we really believe that “someone” told Murray of an un-named couple (Couple 2 on the list) who knew of the ‘Mystery Couple’ (Couple 1 on the list) and who tipped off the police about them?

And that Scotland Yard are frantically searching for Mr and Mrs Mystery?

Perhaps they should put out a description of the pair?  

Are the un-named couple able to describe the Mystery Couple? 

Jane Tanner might be able to assist them if they are struggling, she managed to turn her faceless, bald suspect into a good looking guy with flowing locks.  Fit for a L'Oreal Ad!

Madeleine Fund could meet the costs of having FBI sketch artist brought in, images of Mr and Mrs Mystery beamed around the world.   Leave no stone unturned, as this couple just have to be found.    They could tell the police what Madeleine said to them, if anything, and of course provided they understood English enough at least to understand the child.   They would be able to say whether Madeleine was in her bed or in her parents room, or wandering around the apartment crying.   So much they could tell the police about the McCann apartment!  How long they spent comforting the children, at what time they did this?  What made them try the patio door to see if it would open?  Why they did not contact police or Ocean Club staff?    Yet from what Murray said, the un-named couple knew of it?

What nonsense - A mystery couple who happened to be passing the McCann apartment and heard a child/ren cry, so took it upon themselves to go inside console the child/ren!    As one does, pops into the homes of strangers to check on their children.  (or did this couple live in the same block as 5A?)

I think in law that comes under, breaking and entering, and perhaps a whole lot more if you've been "comforting" children you do not know.  And more astonishingly did not report the matter of the abandoned children to police!

Mr and Mrs Mystery might never surface as if they did not have the inclination on that night to do what was right, to contact police authorities, Ocean Club staff, they must know they are in rather hot water now.  

But how strange, they had the compassion to comfort the children - and then for some unknown  reason, they themselves then did a "McCann" - walked out and left the children alone again, did not seek further help for them?

And an un-named couple who know of this, what this Mystery Couple did?  We would have to presume that the two couples spoke together.  How else would the un-named couple know the reason why the Mystery Couple had gone into the McCann apartment?  Unless of course Chinese Whispers.   It may be the whole village of Praia da Luz knew or know of  Mr and Mrs Mystery.

The McCann kids must have bust a gut crying to make themselves heard by passers- by out on the street, as the bedroom where they slept, the McCann apartment was the last in the row, secluded so no one would have need to directly pass it to reach their own apartment.  


A Generous Helping of the Brown Stuff

Scotland Yard are trying to find a middle aged couple who are said to have gone into the McCann apartment to comfort Madeleine as she was crying?

Now who is kidding who?  Three missing persons, Madeleine and a friendly middle aged couple, all who vanished from apartment 5A?

Oh how it strikes one as odd such great activity that week in this normally quiet village and all centred around the McCann apartment.  If I did not know better I would think they were selling tickets for a tour of 5A/had sent out invitations!  

Oldfield wanted a peek inside.  O’Brien wanted a peek inside too.  Payne visited Kate and the kids while Gerry was out.  And if they weren’t all poking around inside they were creeping around outside 5a listening at shuttered windows. And strangers too calling in to attend to the McCann children in the absence of their parents. Concerned residents contacting others to ask advice about the abandoned children.   So very busy, an abductor would not dare chance snatching a child. If this alleged abductor had been watching them all week as claimed by Kate McCann, he would have noticed that McCann apartment was a real hive of activity.  He would have had to make an appointment to get in that apartment when no one else was around!

Kate McCann :

"They've been watching us over a matter of days, I'm sure, you know, they know, you know, they must have known that Gerry had just been into the apartment and're right, there was only a small window of opportunity know..."

No we don't know, and neither does Kate or Gerry McCann.  If they played no part in the disappearance of their beautiful daughter Madeleine as Gerry McCann has stated - THEN THEY DON'T KNOW what happened to Madeleine, THEY DON'T KNOW what time she was removed from apartment 5A the Ocean Club, Praia Da Luz in month of May 2007.

But who would take it upon themselves (apart from the lovely Matt Oldfield) to enter the home of a complete stranger to attend to their children for them?

If we thought children were in danger in some way we would phone emergency services for assistance.  In the case of the Ocean Club we would contact staff to alert them to the fact that very young children were distressed and possibly alone in the apartment.

Apart from anything else – I guess we are to take it that this couple accessed the apartment by the unlocked patio door?  They just happened to try the doors?

And did this kindly couple know to return the child safety gate at the top of the stair and the one at the bottom to the position that Kate and Gerry McCann had left it?

Eagle eyed Gerry and Kate would have detected immediately had someone opened either gate on their return to the apartment on the night of 2nd May 2007.   Or rather Gerry would have as he returned first as he was tired!

And Madeleine, why would she not have told her parents of this lovely couple who came a calling, who comforted her and Sean too.  I’m sure their niceness stretched to more than Madeleine!


But enough of the nonsense story, let’s get to what is more interesting, the fact that the Moyes say they did not see Gerry McCann, Jez Wilkins or Jane Tanner on the street that night.

If Mrs Moyes remained on her balcony for any length of time, or even up to around 9.30 pm and if she was looking out at the tapas bar she would no doubt have seen Oldfield, O’Brien and possibly Tanner as they each bobbed back and forth.  Seems to be no mention of having seen them!

So what was the purpose of Murray’s tale?  You decide…

1.    To Show the McCanns in a poor light, to highlight the neglect of their children, sell a few extra papers- pay-back time?

2.   To beef up, give some much needed credibility to Kate McCanns suggestion that the alleged abductor called at 5A the night prior to Madeleine’s disappearance but then returned on the night of the 3rd May 2007 to carry out the dastardly deed?

Thing is, unless the Mystery Couple who called by to comfort Madeleine are also the alleged abductors, then that apartment was real busy that night, the night of the 2nd May 2007.    First the good guys call in, later on the bad guys to check it out in preparation for the abduction on the 3rd May!

It's a wonder the McCann kids got any sleep at all of a night!

And not forgetting her parents doing their regular checks hmm!   Or was that the night they had argued at the tapas bar for the first time in their lives together?

Furthermore, it could not then have been the bad guys (as Kate McCann suggested) who woke Madeleine if she and her brother were already awake and crying, which is the reason, is it not for the 'good guys' the Mystery Couple to have gone into the apartment in the first place.

Unless of course, same as the night Madeleine disappeared, the bad guys were already hiding in 5A – As if!

Whatever the truth behind this latest, whether by accident or design, the Express has forced McCanns between a rock and a hard place. ‘Twas they, the McCanns who first suggested, that someone may have been in the apartment the night prior to Madeleine’s disappearance, Kate McCann made her thoughts known to the Portuguese Police in this regard as she thought it may have significance.

It is now very much impossible for them to dismiss Murray, his tale of the Mystery Couple having gone in to the apartment on that night without it ruling out the possibility that Kate McCann would wish us to believe, the seed which she herself planted  - that the alleged abductor called twice, once on  2nd May 2007 and again on 3rd May 2007.

They challenged robustly the statement given by Mrs Fenn that she heard the McCann children cry.  Their children did not cry on that night they said, Mrs Fenn could not have heard crying!

Why I ask could Mrs Fenn not have heard crying?   

Will the McCanns respond likewise in the case of Mr and Mrs Mystery?

I think not!

It is a sad and sorrowful fact that the stories surrounding the disappearance of this child are becoming more wild with every report we hear.  With the upcoming  libel action raised by the McCann couple against Goncalo Amaral a now retired Portuguese Police detective scheduled to be heard some time soon, and with the odds of them winning, stacked against them, it is without question we will be bombarded with stories of how Madeleine is alive, being held by her abductor.   Every paedophile who has breathed will be named as a suspect, no matter if they were at the time Madeleine was reported as missing, at the other side of the world.

As the libel case gets closer it is more crucial that there are sightings of Madeleine, that she is "alive."  

We can be sure that every worker, cleaner, cook, gardener receptionist at the Ocean Club will come under suspicion, every resident in Praia da Luz will be considered capable of having taken Madeleine.   There will be stories of how they could have "taken" the child in the 3 minute slot the McCanns insist she was removed from the apartment.

It is not the police who have said Madeleine was removed at around 9:15 that was put out there by McCanns!

It can be anyone, anyone at all who took her, it doesn't matter who is accused, as long as we understand that we must accept that the child was removed at the time McCanns have decided.

Last week 20 suspects in the village...these numbers will grow dramatically.  

It is has always thus far been crucial to the McCanns, the libel case that Madeleine is considered to be "alive."

Tenuous links to cases of other cases of missing children found years later have always been introduced by them.

Sensational headlines such as the Mailonline of today - The monster who may have taken Madeleine or some other such silly like nonsense puts another slant on matters.

If this guy did take the child - guaranteed then she will not be alive!

Is it a case now that the McCanns for the sake of the libel action will be willing to go along with this that their daughter may have been killed by a paedophile, just as long as she did not die in apartment 5A and they are not accused of concealing a criminal act?

Is there a patsy paedophile being lined up to take the fall? Even a dead one?

Nothing in this case would now surprise me.   

How long realistically can the McCanns continue as they have been doing?   With each passing day fewer believe their story, fewer donate to that Fund.   And if they lose the libel case?

Are they now looking for an 'out?'   


They have said they now have a new life, a new normality.   Does this new life, new normality involve continuing with the unbelievable story of abduction or have they decided it is time to bring an end?

The Metropolitan Police cannot continue indefinitely.

They quite clearly have to have an 'out' now too, and that 'out' is looking as though they are kicking the ball straight back into the Portuguese court.

Even David Cameron cannot convince the UK taxpayers that the pot of money he found which he claimed came from his special fund for special cases, is bottomless!   His 'out?' The well has run dry?

The libel case is so very important to McCanns it is this I believe which will determine whether they continue with their Fund and what really has become a farce!

The latest press stories are not about Madeleine, her whereabouts, what became of her, finding her.   They are about her parents, the protection of their reputations, though some might argue there is nothing left of them to protect.  But it is their lifestyle their careers they have no desire to see being destroyed tarnished in any way.

I truly hope that there is someone out there who can throw some light on what happened to this child, a genuine witness who can help.  She was not majicked away.   Someone, and someone very close knows what happened that fateful night!

The discrepancies in the stories told by the McCanns and their holiday companions do not stand up to scrutiny.

Quite shockingly no one, no one within the UK media will stand up and ask the questions which need to be asked.  They prefer to churn out tall tales.

To discover what happened to the child one must start at the beginning - with the timeline of events as stated by the parents and their companions.   

Perhaps when Martin Brunt finds his missing cahoonas he might be the perfect candidate to ask that which needs asking of this group!

These manufactured stories by Murray and others of his ilk are not to helpful to Madeleine, they are shameful and those who play a part in them, who are involved in any way should be utterly ashamed of themselves.

Daily, The Silence of the McCanns in condemning such reporting becomes more loud!

Until Murray changes his menu stops serving up the same dish of tripe, there can be no justice for Madeleine.
25th May 2013

Website Builder