The Strange Case of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the McCanns 360


I have a confession to make. Back in 2014 I posted that I was going to write something further on the subject of the McCanns. In the end I did not, because I was surprised by the strong emotional reaction I received, from a number of decent people, who were enraged that I might be prepared to write something not to the McCanns’ advantage. But I regret being so pusillanimous, particularly as so much discussion has been suppressed by the extremely aggressive stance taken on threats of libel action on this story.

So in the full knowledge that some decent people will be outraged, here it is.

This week there have been two more developments. The Home Office has announced that it will fund still further the police investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance, on which £10 million has already been spent. Plus the appeals court in Lisbon has overturned the libel verdict against the Portuguese detective Goncalo Amaral, who led the case and formed his own firm convictions at to what happened. The 500,000 euro libel award to the McCanns is now cancelled.

None of these sums of money would matter in the least, and practically nobody would grudge any expense, to have Madeleine McCann alive, safe and happy. There can be nothing worse for a parent than the loss of a child, whatever the circumstances. If the McCanns genuinely do not know what happened, that must be agonising beyond belief. My grandparents had a nineteen year old son, an uncle I never knew, missing in action in World War 2 and the pain never left them, even when his fate was resolved.

And yet, and yet… It is because our children are so precious to us that we treat them as such. I recall an incident on Jamie’s first birthday, which we spent in a hotel in Italy. I was in the room with Jamie. My then wife had gone out to the car. The birthday cake was delivered to reception and had to be paid for. Jamie was fast asleep. I dashed out of the hotel room, down two flights of steps to reception, literally threw the money at them and ran back up the stairs. I was away under two minutes but have never experienced such adrenalin, nor would wish to again. An overwhelming instinct had kicked in telling me I had done wrong in leaving the baby unattended, even so briefly.

I find the McCanns’ behaviour indefensible. There appears to be a disconnect in the public mind in the UK which prevents people from realising just how far the McCanns were from their children. This is a useful graphic just to see the layout, (do not worry about the other info on it).

maddie2_09_map

The McCanns could not actually see their apartment from the tapas bar due to the wall around the pool. To get back there, they had to use the gate and walk around that wall, which made it a 75 yard hike. And the apartment had double doors onto the street on the opposite side of the block from that facing the pool.

I do not see how anybody understanding this geography can consider that it was normal parenting for the McCanns to leave two one year olds and a three year old, alone in the apartment in these circumstances – for hours, and repeatedly several days running. It is something I would absolutely never dream of doing with my own children. If nothing else, had any of the children been crying and in distress – and the chances of that with three tiny children are pretty high – there was no way they could hear them.

The claimed abduction is not the only thing that could have happened. Cholic. Vomiting. Sore nappies. Coughing. Choking. Bad dreams. Overheating. All kinds of thing can distress children. So far as I can judge, it is not that I am weird in my own views, rather it is absolutely accepted in British society that you do not leave 1 year olds without care of an adult. Why are the McCanns an exception?

Which leads me on to the question of why they received such exceptional treatment from British authorities, directed straight from No. 10, to the extent that Blair and Brown eventually gave them a PR representative? I used at one stage to be Resident Clerk in the FCO, a now abolished post effectively of night duty officer. I can tell you from horrible personal experience that the FCO deals with gut-wrenching cases of lost or dead children abroad frequently. I spent one of the most terrible three hours of my life, through to a cold dawn, on the phone with a hysterical bereaved mother desperate to explore any avenue that might give a possibility that the boy who had just drowned in Brazil was misidentified as her son. On average, I am afraid such tragedies get substantially less than 1% of the public resources that were devoted to the McCanns.

I am going to come straight out with this. British diplomatic staff were under direct instruction to support the McCanns far beyond the usual and to put pressure on the Portuguese authorities over the case. I have direct information that more than one of those diplomatic staff found the McCanns less than convincing and their stories inconsistent. Embassy staff were perturbed to be ordered that British authorities were to be present at every contact between the McCanns and Portuguese police.

This again is absolutely not the norm. On a daily basis more British citizens have contact with foreign authorities than the total staff of the FCO. It would be simply impossible to give that level of support to everybody. Plus, against jingoistic presumption, a great many Brits who have contact with foreign police are actually criminals.

The British Ambassador in Portugal, John Buck, had been my direct boss in the FCO. he was Deputy Head of Southern European Department when I was Head of Cyprus Section. He and his staff were concerned by contradictions in the McCann’s story. The Embassy warned, in writing, that being perceived as too close to the McCanns might not prove wise. They demanded the instruction from London be reconfirmed. It was.

I know of people’s misgivings because I was told directly. But material was also leaked to a Belgian newspaper confirming what I have said. It was published by the Express, but like so much other material which is not supportive of the McCanns, it got taken down. Fortunately that last link preserved it. It also shows that the FCO continues to refuse Freedom of Information requests for the material on the interesting grounds that it might damage relations with Portugal.

For the avoidance of doubt, I do not believe there was a high level paedophile ring involved. I make no such argument. Nor do I claim to know what happened to Madeleine McCann. But I do believe that the McCanns were less than exemplary parents. I believe that New Labour’s No.10 saw, in typical Blair fashion, a highly photogenic tragedy which there might be popularity in appearing to work on.

And I believe there is a genuine danger that the high profile support from the top of the British government might have put some psychological pressure on the Portuguese investigators and prosecuting officers in their determinations.

Liked this article? Please consider sharing (links below). Then View All Latest Posts


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

360 thoughts on “The Strange Case of Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and the McCanns

1 2 3 4 5
  • Marvin Huebner

    This is a snippet from the interview with Leicestershire police with McCanns holiday pal Rachel Oldfield regarding her routine to check on her baby daughter:
    “Okay, and when you went to check on Grace, what sort of checks would you conduct”
    Reply ‘Erm well we’d go into the room, which ordinarily we wouldn’t do to be honest, erm but she seemed to have diarrhoea and kind of, I mean she’d settled quite well actually cos she’d been tired every evening, erm but every morning when she woke up, she had diarrhoea and it had gone right through her grow bag and so there’s all of this sort of horrendous smell, so in the evenings when we were checking, we’d go into the room just to see if you know, there was any sort of smell yet, erm and just to make sure she was alright, to make sure she hadn’t been sick, partly I think cos Matt had been sick, just wanted to make sure that she hadn’t been, in case it was some sort of bug”
    Iit is incomprehensible why the McCanns as well as their holiday pals have not been charged with child neglect. Who would leave a baby suffering from diarrhoea alone???? Who???

  • Paul Barbara

    @ Moo April 22, 2016 at 11:14
    ‘Holly also named people and locations that didn’t exist!
    One only has to watch her in interview to realise she is severely mentally challenged and takes all cars from her clearly deluded mother.
    I have to ask, how and why the mother of a severely disabled child, allegedly repeatedly raped from the age of six did not notice any physical indicators? Are we to believe Holly bathed, dressed and used a toilet completely independently from such a young age?
    This case is nothing more than the deluded rantings of a clearly sick woman and her hanger on.’

    ”Holly also named people and locations that didn’t exist!’?? You mean like the Sheriff’s sister, and her house?
    Has it not occurred to you that a woman, whose house may have been used for sexually abusing Hollie and other children, could have been referred to as ‘sis’ or ‘sister’, by the Sheriff, as people sometimes refer to a friend, or even a stranger, as ‘bruv’ or brother? Or Hollie could even have been intentionally misinformed that the woman was the Sheriff’s sister, just in case anything got out, so she could be discredited by telling police and others that the Sheriff’s sister was involved.
    The mother’s brother died in very mysterious circumstances, after previously coming across Hollie’s father abusing Hollie. He warned him never to do it again.
    His death was ruled suicide by the authorities, he was found in a burnt-out car. But they were very reluctant to give Anne, Hollie’s mother and Robert’s (the victim) brother, a copy of the autopsy report. When she eventually got it, here’s the result:
    https://eyreinternational.wordpress.com/2012/03/29/the-deeply-upsetting-story-of-hollie-greig-2/
    ‘….Now we come to the autopsy result which in my opinion gives a very clear cut verdict of murder and not suicide…….one could even possible think that this could be called a political assassination as Robert Greig really did know too much, especially about people in high places. He was totally devoted to his sister Anne and dear Hollie. The Autopsy gave the verdict of death by smoke inhalation but also noted that Robert had severe damage to his skull, two broken ribs and a broken sternum. In addition to this his body also contained much alcohol (even though Robert was a non drinker) and the autopsy found residue of whiskey in his stomach. A person apparently came across the car and attempted to save Robert which came across as a sort of heroic story when in actual fact it is believed that this person was indeed the murderer….’
    Like Gary Webb, a big thorn in the sides of the US Establishment, especially the Clinton’s, who ‘committed suicide’ by shooting himself TWICE in the head, or French paparazzi James Andanson, owner of a certain whiote Fiat Uno, and closely involved with the Princess Di case, who ‘committed suicide’ by burning himself to death in a car on a French military training area (yet whom a first-responding fireman said had two bullet holes in the back of his head).
    Oh, yes, Moo, the ravings of a mad woman!
    And after Anne and Hollie fled to England to get away from the harassment by authorities in Scotland, the English police and SS took up the ball, and continued the harassment. When Hollie and her mother went on holiday, they came back to find their door broken, and a new lock fitted. Turned out the police and council had
    broken in )and trashed the place) because of a tip-off that Hollie had disappeared. My understanding is that the damage has still not been repaired.
    Yes, Moo, ravings all right!
    I suggest you read through a previous post and comments:
    ‘The Surveillance State Should Be Targeted on Cows’:
    https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2016/04/the-surveillance-state-should-be-targeted-on-cows/
    Moo indeed!

    • Moo

      As I say, raped from the age of 6 but this ‘caring’ mother didn’t notice?
      Holly is abused alright. By her mother & Green.

      The poor girl can barely talk yet we are to believe she can name full names & locations and even other victims? ‘Victims’ I might add who totally refute her allegations.

      The whe sorry tale is a including the murder allegation. . A figment of seriously disturbed individuals

  • cherry

    Fantastic articles on this blog and great to see someone speaking out on this case.

    Many of us have been researching and discussing the case for years and incensed at how the Mainstream media do not publish the facts.

    this group is based on factual information and Official Police Files – all are welcome to join who want to see Truth and Justice for Madeleine https://www.facebook.com/groups/HiDeHoCONTROVERSYofMadeleineMcCann/ (please remove link if not allowed, thank you)

  • John Blacksmith

    I write not to argue with your views but to ask how you think adding yet more unsourced information can help people’s understanding of this case. As the comments I’ve read demonstrate they merely reinforce views, some of them false, that people already possessed. I have already commented on Christobell’s blog about your claim.

    Sourcing means quoting the primary source, named and identified. The reader can then evaluate the relative validity of the source. In this harsh world even primary sources are not equal: Buck’s account of anything, for example, would always be weaker than a court report of him giving evidence on the matter. And, as I’ m sure you’re aware a newspaper article of any kind is not a source: it is a channel. Information given in confidence to one person remains confidential – i.e not available, and therefore useless to others, unless the confidence is waived or breached.

    So, your claims and your evidence for them:

    “British diplomatic staff were under direct instruction to support the McCanns far beyond the usual and to put pressure on the Portuguese authorities over the case.” You have provided o evidence to support this claim.

    “British diplomatic staff were under direct instruction to support the McCanns far beyond the usual and to put pressure on the Portuguese authorities over the case.” Which staff, when and where?

    “Embassy staff were perturbed to be ordered that British authorities were to be present at every contact between the McCanns and Portuguese police.” That is not something that British authorities had the right to instruct, nor the Portuguese to concede, and we know that “British authorities” were not permitted to be present in their statement giving etc. So who were these embassy staff?

    “He and his staff were concerned by contradictions in the McCann’s story. The Embassy warned, in writing, that being perceived as too close to the McCanns might not prove wise. They demanded the instruction from London be reconfirmed. It was. I know of people’s misgivings because I was told directly.” So please tell us who they were and what they said.

    “But material was also leaked to a Belgian newspaper confirming what I have said. It was published by the Express, but like so much other material which is not supportive of the McCanns, it got taken down. Fortunately that last link preserved it. It also shows that the FCO continues to refuse Freedom of Information requests for the material on the interesting grounds that it might damage relations with Portugal.” As I said a newspaper article is not a source. Mr Murray, if you are unaware of the connections between the Belgian press, a part Belgian “journalist” hustler with McCann fibs to sell and the owner and views and reliability of the very blog you quoted, you might we wise to check them. And note the date of the Express piece – when the owner of that paper still believed it was open season to print unreliable junk to heat up the story.

    “I believe that New Labour’s No.10 saw, in typical Blair fashion, a highly photogenic tragedy which there might be popularity in appearing to work on.” Well that’s your belief. My own is pretty much the same except that I would put it more strongly – that Blair and co attached themselves like jellyfish to any pop sentimental incident they could. For show and nothing but show. I have posted that view of Christobell’ s blog today.

    “And I **believe** there is a ** genuine danger** [so not a fact then] that the high profile support from the top of the British government **might** have put some psychological pressure on the Portuguese investigators and prosecuting officers in their determinations.” Again, fair enough as opinion and personal belief. It’s possible. But you haven’t, I repeat, provided any evidence to support it.

    Best wishes.

    • Paul Barbara

      Most of the folks on this blog accept Craig’s word. This blog is not a Court of Law.
      You’re not, by any chance, the ‘Blacksmith’ that Richard Gage wiped the floor with, I trust?

    • Ba'al Zevul

      I’m sure you won’t mind me pointing out, in the interests of strict accuracy, that adult jellyfish do not attach themselves to anything. They are free-swimming organisms. You would be correct in saying that the larval scyphistoma stage attaches itself to a convenient substrate before strobilating and dividing into free=swimming ephyrae, but this is hardly common knowledge, and a poor basis for a good simile. Either ‘leech’ or ‘tick’ would adequately convey the attached parasitic habit to which Blair’s modus operandi still conforms. I’m a pedant? You’d know….

  • Susan Davidson

    People should not leave young children like that to go out drinking. They ought to have arranged before they left for their holiday, for a baby sitter to be available, or else leave the the kids at home with relatives, and go on their own if it was their intent to be out socializing every night.

  • Carolynn Hall

    Yes I agree they were very wrong to leave Maddie. I have four now grown up children and would never trust anyone or leave my children
    We stayed at the same place with our little girl (then 4) Pria da Lux. She went on a fashion show outing – but- we were walking right behind the group of children. She went to the beach – we followed the carers down and watched their every move. And never took our eyes off of our daughter who was just feet away. It is careless beyond anything that they left three tots in that chalet. I do wish en end would come to this and Maddie would be found.

    • John Spencer-Davis

      Children can disappear in a heartbeat. My wife and I learned to visually check the children about every thirty seconds – and even within that, between your glance roving and then returning, your child can be gone. Somewhere. My wife once had about ten mothers running around a park bellowing our youngest daughter’s name – eventually, she appeared at the top of a slide the wrong way up which she had been climbing, concealed from everyone. There is no feeling like checking your child’s whereabouts to discover them gone.

  • Paul Barbara/855

    I don’t know what happened here, other than that the parents were extremely negligent.
    I also know that a parent, or even both, can be complicit in a child’s disappearance. I am absolutely not suggesting that is the case here.
    BUT, for a better understanding of child disappearance, here are a few links:
    http://www.johnnygosch.com/ Noreen Gosch, Johnny’s mother, found out her husband had been in cahoots with the abductors. Watch her harrowing video, on above link. She also wrote a book, ‘Why Johnny Can’t Come Home’, the same title as her video.
    Also see John DeCamp: ‘Conspiracy Of Silence’ (Banned Discovery Channel Documentary):
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttT6FrMosBk He also wrote ‘The Franklin Cover-Up’.
    I have just found some sites that seem to suggest John De Camp has died in mysterious circs, but I can’t find confirmation or otherwise on a quick search, and have to sign off as I need to get to A&E as I seem to have re-broken my thumb. which is in a splint.

    • Nico

      “The Franklin Cover-up” is essential reading to understand how elite paedophilia becomes embedded in the establishment. The Hampstead scandal is another current example.

  • Chris

    The other problem of course is the millions and millions of pounds of British taxpayers money spent since 2011 on trying to discredit the original Portuguese inquiry and prove the abductor theory put forward by the parents. So far not one shred of the McCanns’ abductor story has been backed up by anything arising from this current enquiry, which is why the leaders of tht enquiry have remined silent for the past five years.

    The British were able to pursue leads that the original 2007 Portuguese investigation was either unable to follow up due to cost or refused to follow up because of implausibility, which is a kind of progress, but the bottom line is that once again the original investigator’s judgement in deciding which leads to pursue and which not to pursue has been proved correct.They have also, sadly, raised sufficent doubt in my mind that Madeline’s body will ever be found. The money that has been wasted by this attempt to second-guess and undermine what was, in the circumstances, a thorough and uncompromisingly professional investigation is of course a major public scandal, but no policeman, politician or government official past or present, Labour or Conservative, will ever be held to account for it.

    The key to this disappearance, as in all such cases of this type, lies with the parents. Until the parents are properly investigated and cross-examined (something that has not happened in nine years) we will never know what really happened.

    • David Winsland

      I tend to agree with you on this. I have not been an avid follower of this case but have always been amazed how this one little girl has been singled out for so much attention and public money amongst the many who go missing each year. Likewise the parents have been portrayed as being ‘like saints’ while they, in their actions, certainly were not. In addition I commend the author of the article above.

  • Paul Barbara

    @ Nico April 26, 2016 at 07:09
    “The Franklin Cover-up” is essential reading to understand how elite paedophilia becomes embedded in the establishment. The Hampstead scandal is another current example.’

    I picketed the Hampstead church said to be at the centre of the allegations on a number of Sundays.

  • Angus

    The whole thing is mind blowing, so much for me, it ranks alongside 911, JFK and the vote on Scottish Independence.
    Truths and reasons hidden and unexplained that will never come out.
    Greater forces at work

    • John Goss

      I nthink you are right Angus, right on all three. You could add a whole lot more, like Lockerbie, Gaitskell, David Kelly, Princess Diana, but how long have we got on planet Earth? Sorry that sounds like a threat. 🙂

  • tricky dicky

    Craig Murray , the ultimate false flag the ultimate gate keeper , genius sack him so he can set up a blog to suck in all the CTN .Genius

  • D Farrell

    Looking at the location of the Appartment building in relation to the bar, I am speechless! I wouldn’t leave my dogs that far away. There is no way they could hear or see the children. I thought there was supposed to be a baby monitor with them? No way would a monitor work so far away. The entire story is bizarre.

    • Hils

      It’s New Year 2017, almost 10yrs since little Madeleine McCann vanished, her parents are again on the front pages of the daily newspapers imploring everyone to keep looking for Madeleine and asking anyone with information on her whereabouts to come forward.
      We all have our theories on what may have happened but in truth, no-one knows for sure except the person/persons directly involved in her disappearance.
      No doubt, whatever the scenario, several individuals are in the know and it’s surely a heavy burden to carry. I sincerely hope that this is the year the truth comes to light – sending positive thoughts of love, hope & peace to little Ms Madeleine xx

  • Darren Baker

    I have been saying from day one of this tragedy that not much investigation went into the absolute negligence of the two parents.There is no question if they were of a lower standing there would have been an investigation and the two remaining children would have been removed from them due to negligence I have no doubt. Instead they became celebritys with book deals. What a shame ! But it seems to late for anyone to call them to task for this crime & maybe the death of a child.

    • Nick

      It certainly seems the truth will never out. As when the msm reports “there is no evidence madeleine has been physically harmed” when the sniffer dog testing suggests otherwise is strange
      Once again every article seems to be about money and how the mc canns could be bankrupted by the appeal against them being upheld. What has happened to the millions put in to the pot by joe public? I for one am glad amaral has had his appeal upheld. At least his conclusions are evidence based unlike the tripe our msm foists upon us round this poor childs disappearance.

    • Kathleen Griffiths

      My thoughts exactly Darren Baker. why were they not prosecuted for neglect? i feel there is a big cover up to protect the mccanns for some reason.No other missing child has had all this money and publicity like this except recently Ben Needham got some 21yrs too late.

  • Christine mercer

    I’ve been told that just after Maddie went missing a Portuguese lady left her two children in the house because she needed to go to the shop and it was pouring with rain. This lady was prosecuted and almost lost her children….so what’s so different for the mcscabs

  • Jo

    I am in no doubt that Kate and Gerry McCann will live with this tragedy for every day of their lives.

    That said, however, all these years later I, like Craig, cannot believe those children were left on their own, a three year old and two babies, in an unlocked flat in a holiday complex. A complex with baby-sitting facilities which they didn’t use as they didn’t “trust it”. Maddy was three. It was conceivable that she could wander around during the night, three year olds do that sometimes. All the more reason never to consider leaving her alone. She was more mobile than the twins, a toddler already walking by herself and well able to have an accident in the flat never mind outside of it, never mind someone taking her.

    Yes, I’m sure the McCanns remain distraught. Yes, I’m sure they blame themselves. That, however, is as it should be when it was Maddy who paid the price. Those little twins will also pay a price as they grow up being Madeleine McCann’s siblings.

    Ghastly. What possessed these people and their friends to disregard the safety of their own small children in such an irresponsible manner on such a regular basis?

  • David Hudson

    The level of Govetnment interferference cannot be attributed to a “photogenic tragedy”. That feature of the case could not have been realised less than 2 hours after the disappearance – unless, of course, it was known about in advance. The high level immediate interference can only be explained by the need to cover up something very sinister

  • John Goss

    Craig, I am glad you continue to pursue this. Like you I have reservations about the full story and the way the McCains have been treated like celebrities. Something is not right. I was really cross with one of my sons when the McCains were being interviewed on MSM (probably BBC) news and he said: “They did it!” I told him that was a very hurtful thing to say about grieving parents. People do grieve in different ways.

    But it was the sniffer-dog video that changed my mind and I believe it is futile to search for Madeleine. She is dead, poor little thing. That is what I believe. Dogs are not like us. They are loyal if treated well. But they have enhanced senses we have not. Their sense of smell is incredible. They can be trained in this very special skill and obviously the dogs, one was trained to sniff out blood, the other to sniff out corpses. From what I have seen I now believe that Madeleine died in what was then her bedroom.

  • John Goss

    ” Fortunately that last link preserved it.” I hope so but I cannot read it because the “blog is only open to invited readers only”. I have no problem with that as long as it is preserved. Please check.

  • patricia isobel treslove

    I really fail to see why the British Tax payers are still paying for this hoax, there has been no evidence at all, that Madeleine was abducted,Why are we paying these people, to continue spreading their lies around the world, they are going from one country to another holding out their begging bowl. They should have been charged at the beginning with child neglect.

    The British Government is corrupt, it is time to stop spending OUR taxes on this case. it can only be solved by the McCann’s telling the truth, and we all know they will never do that.

  • Susan Griffiths

    I would like to know why the ” parents ” of Madeline were not given the truth drug ? Or was this against their human rights ? I have never & would never leave our children ( who are now parents them selves ) Not even for a second were our children left alone

    • Pete

      @Susan Griffiths, the reason the McCanns “weren’t given the truth drug” is because there is no such thing as a “truth drug.” You’re referring to sodium amytal, sodium pentothal, and similar barbiturates, their effect is much the same as alcohol, just easier to control the dose by intravenous injection. People lose their inhibitions when drunk, and in some cases this leads to them revealing information, but people can lie and fantasise when drunk just as easily. Same goes for hypnosis. There is no back door to the human mind that can be opened by anyone from outside.

      “Lie detectors” (polygraph machines) don;t work either- or at least, they only work on honest people who get anxious (raised heart rate, blood pressure, skin conductance) when lying because they fear being found out. Psychopaths feel no different when they’re lying than when they’re telling the truth, because the distinction has no emotional significance to them.

      • glenn_uk

        Pete: “…they only work on honest people who get anxious (raised heart rate, blood pressure, skin conductance) when lying because they fear being found out.”

        Absolutely. Or they “work” to provide a false positive, because an innocent person is very anxious about appearing guilty under questioning; particularly when the crime they’re accused of is plausible, and their liberty might depend upon not appearing anxious while having very accusatory questions put to them.

        It’s a much more sophisticated version of “liars always sweat when being harshly questioned”.

        Consider that your wife has gone missing for a week. You have no idea where, and fear greatly for her safety. The finger is starting to be pointed at you. Which of these questions would indicate discomfort when giving an emphatic answer of NO:

        “Is water completely dry?” – marks down results.
        “Is the Earth totally flat?” – marks down results.

        Ok, baseline established.

        “Have you ever ran a 4-minute mile?” – Compares results to earlier checks, appears to be true.
        “Are you the Pope?” – Compares results to earlier checks, appears to be true.

        “Did you, in fact, murder your wife for the insurance, and dispose of her body by cutting her up into small pieces while draining her blood down the sewer system (after getting your dog to lap up the spills), and throwing the body parts in random sections of the waterways, over the course of several days while pretending to be a distressed husband, in the most evil and calculating manner?”

        OMG, just look at the reaction!

  • Conan

    I still experience guilt at having left a sleeping infant strapped in the car seat for less than a minute, though never out of sight, when paying for petrol more than two decades ago. No harm done, thankfully.
    However, I have long believed the McCanns should have been charged with child neglect leading to the disappearance and possible death of their eldest child.
    Everything else is distraction.

    • Kathleen Hammett

      Everyone still on thinking it was abduction & the parents neglect that they got away with. The mccanns & friends openly admitted to neglecting their children though tried to lighten it by lying that they were closer to them than they actually were & one of the children left was unwell with a chance of vomiting. How sure are we some of these people were actually from a medical profession as I don’t know any that would advise leaving children on their own let alone ill children!! What’s sticks out for me is they readily admitted to neglect yet have never felt the least bit responsible for Madeleines disappearance. There was absolutely no evidence of an abductor only the parents say so. Only fingerprints found were the mothers, no smug es or smears from anyone else. No broken/smashed shutters as first claimed and bit by bit their stories, which were inconsistent anyway, start to change to match police findings.. If what they first reported was actually what did happen they how could their version change, the truth is the truth , one version , however, lies have the tenancy to change evrytime they are repeated.. Im of the mind that there was no abduction and the Portuguese police were on the right track.

  • Clivejw

    Mr. Murray is quite responsible in limiting his questions to the issue of why the McCanns were afforded an inordinate amount of political and diplomatic attention compared with the parents of other missing children in foreign parts. But unfortunately, an article like this was bound to attract the usual crazies and conspiracy theorists. Enough of their claims are demonstrable fictions to discourage me from examining further. I think it would have been better not to have opened this article to comments.

1 2 3 4 5