AMBSASSADOR
JOHN BUCK
The
British Ambassador’s .phone call to Alipio Ribeira at 11.00pm on Thursday 3 May
2007: Is this yet more evidence of a
pre-planned state cover-up of Madeleine’s death on Sunday 29 April?
by John
Whitehouse of the Madeleine McCann Research Group, 7 July 2017
A Introduction
Amidst the continuing determination by some
to insist, at all costs, that the theory of Goncalo Amaral and the PJ that
Madeleine died after 6pm on Thursday 3 May 2007 must be maintained, whatever
the evidence, we present a discussion of a newspaper article published in Correia de Manhã on 12 August 2007. This reported a ‘phone call from the
British Ambassador to Alipio Ribeira at 11.00pm that night.
We will also review other matters rerlating
to Ambassador Buck, including the evidence that Robert Murat was recruited by
the British Ambassador or by the British security services to supply
translation services to the PJ on the morning of Friday 4 May 2007 and in the
following days. We suggest that the information on this article strongly
supports claims of an establishment cover-up of the truth about Madeleine
McCann - run and managed by Britain’s security services, including MI5.
Our article will provide further evidence, if
it is needed, that Madeleine died well before 3 May - and that those who
continue to defend Amaral’s theory of ‘death after 6pm Thursday’ should once
again reconsider the evidence.
In this respect we endorse the statement on
Jill Havern’s forum, The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann (CMOMM) that “New
research in [our research] section points to Maddie's death being on the Sunday
or Monday and not Thursday 3 May”. It would appear to us that it is this
positive declaration on CMOMM that has led to the unwarranted attacks on CMOMM
of late by those who, for any one of a number of reasons, want people to focus
their attention on the period 6pm to 10pm on 3 May and who refuse therefore to
look at the evidence of what happened much earlier in the week.
It should always be remembered that both the
PJ in their interim report of 10 September 2007 (by Tavares de Almeida) and
Goncalo Amaral himself relied on just ONE alleged fact to determine that
Madeleine died after 6pm on the Thursday night: namely they believed (a) that
the nanny Catriona Baker was an independent witness and (b) that she was
telling the truth about having seen Madeleine at an alleged ‘high tea’ at
between 5pm and 6pm on the Thursday. We have given evidence in our previous
articles that both these beliefs were very likely to have been wrong.
B The article of 12 August 2007
in Correia da Manhã
First, we reproduce below an English
translation of the full Correia da Manhã article,
courtesy of the News Winnow blog,
which the blog owner uploaded the very same day it appeared, 12 August 2007, see here:
http://newsoutlines.blogspot.co.uk/2007/08/pj-forced-to-investigate-abduction.html
PJ
forced to investigate abduction track
8/12/2007
Posted by Winnower
PJ forced to investigate abduction track
August
12, 2007 - José Carlos Marques
Introduction: Alipio Ribeiro, national director of the
Judicial Police received a telephone call from John Buck, the British
ambassador in Portugal, on the night Madeleine disappeared from the Ocean Club,
May 3.
GOOGLE
TRANSLATION [‘revised by MMRG simply for clarity]:
At about
23:00, about two hours after the child's disappearance, Alipio Ribeiro had to take
a break from his dinner to speak to the diplomat [Ambassador John Buck]. The ‘phone
call was the first sign that the British were very interested in following the actions of the PJ very closely - and push
towards investigating an abduction.
"The PJ has lost too much time
investigating the abduction," said a source close to Correia da Manhã. The pressure from the British Ambassador only
slowed down when the British police officers arrived in Portugal. They tried to
direct the investigation to follow the investigation hypothesis.
The recent biological evidence found in the
apartment, however, was decisive in changomg the course of the investigation - or
at least for the PJ to publicly admit that change.
The decision to strengthen the hypothesis of
the death of the child at the Ocean Club - and the consequent re-evaluation of
the statements of Madeline’s parents and their friend – was despite the views
of the British police.
Olegario Sousa, the Chief Inspector of the
Judiciary Police, who has been the police spokesman in this case, yesterday gave
interviews to the BBC and ITN, and said he agreed that there was a change in
the police positon.
The choice of these two television channels by
Snr Sousa was motivated by the police’s outrage at the conduct of the British
police and by the objectionable statements made by the British press about the
PJ’s conduct of the investigation. The BBC and ITN are considered to have
treated the case with more detachment and impartiality, hence their privileged
access to Snr Sousa.
Olegario Sousa admitted for the first time in
public the possibility of Madeleine being dead. This positon now leaves the
McCanns in the very centre of the investigation, a situation which has had to
be delicately managed ‘with tweezers' by Portuguese police.
The McCann couple has relied on the help of
powerful friends. The former spokesman for the McCanns, Clarence Mitchell, who
organised the trips of Madeleine’s parents to several European countries, is
currently a special adviser to Gordon Brown, the current British Prime Minister.
Brown supported the McCanns from the
beginning, with the help of the couple’s friend, Jill Renwick, a close friend of John Brown,
brother of the British Prime Minister. According to the Guardian, Jill approached John on the street, leading him to
contact his brother.
SUPPORT
Father Haynes Hubbard, who conducted a
special service yesterday in Praia da Luz, has expressed his support for the
McCanns in their decision to stay in Portugal: "If it were my daughter, I
would not leave here”, he said.. Hubbard stressed that the ceremony served to
make Kate and Gerry feel that "we are with them in their grief@.
"WE WILL NOT GIVE UP"
"We will not give up looking," said
Gerry McCann, his voice breaking, during the service held yesterday morning in
the church of Praia da Luz, marked the hundredth day after Madeleine's
disappearance. The girl's parents could not hide their emotion in the religious
ceremony, celebrated in English and conducted by Anglican priest Haynes
Hubbard.
Kate and Gerry Mcann each spoke twice, confessing
that they are living the ‘darkest days’ of their lives, but have faith that
their daughter will be returned to them. At the end they were applauded by
dozens of people.inside and outside the church.
SPOKESMAN ADMITS THE JUDICIAL DEATH OF CHILD
The spokesman for the Judiciary Police in the
investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann admitted in the BBC interview
the possibility that the girl was dead. Chief Inspector Olegario Sousa also,
however, insisted that the child's parents are not suspects. They are ‘victims
and witnesses’, he said.
A source close to the McCann family said that
“Aafter a tough week, it was reassuring for Gerry and Kate to hear from
official sources that they are not suspects”. But the couple said nothing about
whether her daughter was dead. The parents said that in recent days, the police
presented no evidence that affected them. "Portuguese law does not allow us
to put all our evidence out on the table, so to speak, even for the people
involved”, the Inspector cautioned the BBC.
The PJ’s spokesman explained that: “Developments
that occurred in the last few days yielded new found some clues that may point
to the possible death of the child”, adding: "All lines of investigation are
open and laboratory tests are awaited. But this line of enquiry that Madeleine
is dead is now being pursued with greater vigour”. .
FROM THE BBC INTERVIEW:
"We have found clues that might point to
the child's death" - Olegario Sousa
"We are waiting for test results to explain
the evidence gathered" - Olegario Sousa
"All lines are open. But the
investigation is now being pursued with greater vigour” - . "Olegario
Sousa
"The couple is not suspected. They are
victims, because they lost their daughter, and they are witnesses in the case”.
- Olegario Sousa
C The second article in Correio da Manhã - 14 September 2007
Correio
da Manhã returned to the Madeleine McCann case with this
article on 14 September 2007 (2007-09-14
):
Portuguese: "GOVERNO INGLÊS
CORTA COM McCANN
English: GOVERNMENT CUTS LINKS WITH THE McCANNS
[translation revised by MMRG simply for
clarity]:
The first call Gerry McCann made the night of
the crime was lo Alistair Clark, a university friend of the McCanns and brother
of the current British Prime Minister, Gordon Brown. Clark made various calls to
officials at the highest levels - and before the Judiciary Police arrived, already SKY News and the British Ambassador
had been informed of the abduction.
Ambassador John Buck was in the Algarve.
Gordon Brown also gave his personal
contact details to Maddie's father during their many ’phone calls. However,
from what Correio da Manhã has
learnt, the current British Prime Minister is now “sufficiently disturbed with
the route that the police investigation has taken” to decide to terminate d his
direct link to the couple.
Publicity
and urgent searches had been the priorities in the first hours after Maddie was
reported missing. And as Correio da Manhã
previously reported, John Buck, the British Ambassador in Lisbon, had called
Alípio Ribeiro, National Director of the PJ, the very same evening [Thursday 3rd
may] about an English girl having been abducted in Praia da Luz.
Police investigations began in earnest the following
morning [Friday]. Later that weekend, the Associate National Director of the
PJ, Guilhermino Encarnação, announced to journalists that this was a kidnapping
– but without any traces if an abductor or any ransom notes.
As for publicity surrounding the case, the
first news was broken by SKY News’s representative in the Algarve, from whence
news of Madeleine McCann’s abduction spread rapidly to all the international
media. It needed political involvement to create such international media
interest - and Alistair Clark, Gerry's
friend from the University of Glasgow, who was a student in the International Relations Department
there when Gerry McCann was in the University of Medicine - was the perfect
contact.
Alistair, whom Correio da Manhã was unable to contact before we went to press, is
today a Professor in an university in Belfast, Ireland, and is also an Adviser
to the current British government. The current British Prime Minister, Gordon
Brown, was Chancellor of the Exchequer at the time Madeleine was reported
missing, and had been tipped to replace the then Prime Minister of Britain, Tony
Blair.
British government support for the McCanns
included the appointment of the government’s top media relations officer, the
Prime Minister’s ‘right arm’ in Downing Street, Clarence Mitchell.
Ambassador John Buck, meanwhile, became Director
of the government’s Central Office of Information, part of which is the Media
Monitoring Unit, which was then directed
by Clarence Mitchell, who was directly accountable to the Cabinet Office and to
the Prime Minister.
The route that the PJ investigation took [in
August and September] left Gordon Brown’s cabinet very apprehensive, leading the Prime
Minister to cut his direct linking with Gerry McCann.
END OF PART ONE
==================================================================
PART TWO
D Why did the British Ambassador
interrupt Alipio Ribeiro’s dinner?
The question we now have to consider is why
the British Ambassador would be interrupting Alipio Ribero’s dinner at about
11.00pm that evening.
According to what we know, the alarm that
Madeleine was missing appears to have been raised by the McCanns sometime
between 9.30pm and 10.00pm on the Thursday night. There is some doubt about the
precise time, not least because there is zero independent corroboration of the
account of Kate McCann allegedly rushing down to the Tapas restaurant crying: ’They’ve
taken her’. Indeed, the whole account of how Kate, alone, allegedly discovered
that Madeleine was ‘gone’, is so laden with contradictions that we can accept
the conclusion of Inspector Tavares de Almeida in his interim report of 10
September 2007 that the ‘crime scene’ (the children’s bedroom) was
pre-arranged and that Kate’s account of
finding Madeleine missing is a clear fabrication.
D1. WHAT
HAPPENED THAT EVENING AFTER 10.00pm?– THE POLICE
So, what do we know about the events of, say,
the first two hours after Madeleine was reported missing?
We are told that the Ocean Club reception
were notified by the McCanns or their friends at about 10.30pm.
A call was made to the police - the GNR - at
about 10.40pm.
The GNR arrived at about 11.10pm (see below).
The PJ arrived about midnight.
Staff had begun to look for Madeleine soon
after 10.00pm. The Ocean Club/Mark Warner soon put out an alert to most of their staff.
Soon word spread to some in the village, and some villagers turned out to
search for Madeleine.
But how did word get to the
British Ambassador, John Buck? - by 11.00pm, or just after - some time
before the PJ had even arrived on the
scene?
D2. WHAT
HAPPENED THAT EVENING AFTER 10.00pm?– THE McCANNS AND THEIR FRIENDS
So let’s now look at the actions of the
McCanns and their friends after 10.00pm that Thursday night.
Let’s start with looking at what is said in
Kate McCann’s book, ‘madeleine’, about those events.
She says (p. 73) that “Just after ten past
ten, Gerry asked Matt [Oldfield] to run to the Ocean Club’s 24-hour reception
to get staff to call the police”, adding that our ‘screaming and shouting’ had
alerted other guests and staff that something was amiss”. [NOTE: There is no
independent corroboration of Dr Matt Oldfield reporting Madeleine’s
disappearance at this time - and the Ocean Club have never confirmed it] Some people started to gather outside their
apartment.
A little later (p. 73), she writes that “Mark
Warner had rounded up as many of their colleagues as they could, off-duty staff
as well as those just finishing the shifts…” Then, she says (p. 74) “Close to
ten-thirty they activated the company’s ‘missing child search protocol’ and
mobilised people to comb the complex…”
At 10.35pm (note the precision of the timing,)
she says that “The police had still not arrived”, so, she says, Gerry McCann
asked Matt to go back to the Ocean Club reception to find out what was
happening. John Hill, the Mark Warner resort manager, arrived minutes later on
their veranda. Kate (p. 74) “screamed at him to do something” and ‘yelled’:
“Where are the police?”. She then says
she was so frustrated at the delay that she “was hitting out at things, banging
my fists on the metal railing of the veranda, trying to expel the intolerable
pain inside me”.
A little later, Emma Knights, the Mark Warner
Customer Care Manager, came to the flat (p. 75). Another British woman ‘turned up at our
veranda’ and ‘at about 11pm’ the woman in the flat above (whom we now know to
be Mrs Pamela Fenn) asked: “What is all the noise about?”
Finally, she says (p. 75) “It was not until
about 11.10pm that two policemen arrived, from the nearest town, Lagos, about
five miles away” [MOTE: These were from the GNR – the local police force].
D3. WHAT
HAPPENED THAT EVENING AFTER 10.00pm? - THE MEDIA AND THE FOREIGN AND
COMMONWEALTH OFFICE
When were any media contacted (by anyone)
after Madeleine disappeared? - and when did the Foreign Office get to hear
about the reported abduction of
Madeleine?
The issue of when the media and the Foreign
and Commonwealth Office first got to hear of Madeleine’s reported abduction is
obscure, but let’s see if we can make an educated guess by looking at the data
and the claims that we have.
We read above that, thanks to Correia
da Manhã, that:
1
Gerry made a ‘phone call to his
old university friend, Alistair Clark, brother of Gordon Brown
2
Alistair Clark duly called people
in high places, including, presumably, his brother Gordon
3
British
Ambassador John Buck made a ’phone call to the National Director of Police,
Alipio Ribeiro, at about 11.00pm that evening, and
4
SKY News in the Algarve were the
first to broadcast news of Madeleine’s disappearance.
But we don’t know the exact times nor the sequence of these and
other important events that night.
As regards the early involvement of SKY News,
we have a version of the night’s events
by SKY News’s Ian Woods, as can be seen in this video: ‘The McCanns did not
call SKY News first’, link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p3aOIheKXzI
In the video, Ian Woods denies categorically
that the McCanns ever contacted SKY News. Instead, he says, “The first SKY News
heard of it was at 8.15am on the Friday morning” when, he said, GMTV broadcast
a telephone interview with the McCanns. “That”, added Woods, “was the first time that any
journalists knew about this”.
Now, we can prove that this is incorrect
because we know from the mouth of Jon Clarke, Editor of the Spanish newspaper
the Olive Press, an English language
newspaper published by British ex-pats, that he was contacted by the Sun, and maybe also by the Daily Mail, at around 5.00am (or
before), and told to go to Praia da Luz and report on Madeleine’s
disappearance. He later boasted in his newspaper that he was the first
journalist on the scene, having arrived there sometime in the morning. Clarke
lives in Ronda, Spain, a 5-hour journey by car from Praia da Luz.
For him to be called by the Sun at, say, 5.00am, or quite possibly
earlier, means that someone senior working on the paper must have been briefed
on the story, and made an informed assessment of its news value, before even
picking up the ’phone to talk to Jon Clarke.
Clearly the news wires of the TV and print
media must have been buzzing during the very early hours of the morning.
E The Foreign and Commonwealth
Office’s Freedom of Information Act answer concerning
a Daily Telegraph report about
Madeleine, dated 00.01am, 4 May 2007
Researchers looking to study the very
earliest news reports of the case soon stumbled on an online article about the
case in the Daily Telegraph, timed at
00.01am, on 4 May 2007.That is, just two hours after Madeleine was reported
missing.
Subsequently, we have all learnt that 00.01am
is simply a common default time setting for the print media when they archive
their articles online. It doesn’t by any means indicate that the report was
actually written and published at that time.
Nevertheless, the interest in this apparently
early press report about Madeleine’s alleged abduction led Madeleine McCann
researcher Tony Bennett (then the Secretary of the Madeleine Foundation) to ask
a Freedom of Information Act question, in December 2007, about this and related
matters. This was the result:
QUOTE
MADELEINE MCCANN - ANSWERS FROM THE FOREIGN
OFFICE
Answers supplied by the Foreign Office to the
Madeleine Foundation, 1 February 2008 (Summary)
NOTE from T. Bennett: This information was supplied under the
Freedom of Information Act in response to questions centring around the Daily Telegraph publishing an online
report timed at 00.01 hours on Friday 4 May, referring to Foreign Office
involvement in the abduction of a three-year-old child at 10.00pm the previous
evening. I now think it is probable that the ‘00.01’ time is not the correct
time that the Daily Telegraph report
was filed but that the 00.01 time was left in place when the report was filed
some hours later.
REPLY from the Foreign Office: Reference: FOI
0010-08 (CONS 03/2008)
… verbatim but with parts snipped:
The online [Daily Telegraph] report appears to have been posted 3 minutes after
we were notified that a child had gone missing. If this timing is correct, then
it is impossible that a Foreign Office spokesman could have spoken to the
paper. The timing may be an error. In this case, the duty officer would have
spoken to the Daily Telegraph; however we cannot give any further information
due to the uncertainty over the timing.
At 23:58
on 3 May 2007 our duty officer in Portimao received a call from a Mark Warner
employee reporting that a child had gone missing from the Ocean Bay Club, Praia
da Luz. Our duty officer in Lisbon informed the Foreign & Commonwealth
Office Response Centre in London at 00:30 on 4 May 2007.
We offer consular assistance, depending on
the individual circumstances of each case, to British nationals in distress
overseas. In this case, consular officials provided the appropriate assistance
when the disappearance was first reported. The details about the disappearance
given in the Daily Telegraph article,
namely that the girl’s parents had gone to have dinner once their children were
asleep that night, but returned to check on them only to find that the girl had
gone missing’, were given to our Duty Officer in Portimao when the
disappearance was reported.
Clarence Mitchell was seconded by the Central
Office of Information, where he was the Director of the Media Monitoring Unit,
to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, on 21 May 2007.
In accordance with the Civil Service
Management code, the Foreign & Commonwealth Office refunded reasonable
expenses incurred by Clarence Mitchell in carrying out his duties of providing
assistance to the McCann family in exceptional circumstances. The total amount
was £6,230.90.
The Central Office of Information made a
statement on 17 September 2007 confirming that Clarence Mitchell had resigned
as Director of the Media Monitoring Unit at the Central Office of Information.
For any further information, you will need to apply to that Department.
No Foreign and Commonwealth Office staff were
specifically appointed to assist the McCanns, although a number of our staff
were involved in providing consular assistance to the family. We do not
maintain financial records of the individual costs of consular cases.
UNQUOTE
[ Further discussions about this FOI Act
question-and-answer can be found at these links:
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11382-daily-telegraph-report-4th-may-2007-at-12-01am
https://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t3107-foi-act-questions-who-assured-clarence-mitchell-that-this-was-a-rare-stranger-abduction
]
So, the Foreign Office’s account of event is
clear:
At
11.58pm, Thursday 3 May, a Mark Warner employee (unnamed) telephoned the
Consular office in Portimao to say that a British girl may have been abducted.
There was then contact, presumably a ‘phone
call, from the Consular office in Portimao to the British Embassy in Lisbon.
And then at 00.30am, Friday 4 May, the duty
officer in Lisbon informed the Foreign & Commonwealth Office Response
Centre in London at 00:30am on 4 May 2007.
Thus the very earliest that John Buck, the British Ambassador, could have learned about the alleged abduction was about midnight.
Yet
Correia da Manhã learned that Alipio
Ribeiro had received a telephone call at dinner
from John Buck at about 11.00pm.
How can we explain this?
Gerry McCann’s evidence is that he ’phoned
his sister, Tricia Cameron, on four occasions between 11.40pm and 12.10am, but
apparently she did not return any of his calls.
If we then look at Tricia Cameron’s
statement, she refers to a flurry of ’phone calls between her and Portugal and
says that ‘eventually’ she got through to the British
Embassy in Lisbon. We do not know the time when she did so.
We get a third version from Kate McCann in
her book, ‘madeleine’. She says that Gerry
did
speak to Tricia, while the GNR officers were in the flat, and before the PJ
arrived at about midnight. She writes: “Gerry was a mess - ‘roaring like a
bull’ as Trish put it - and sobbing down the ‘phone…I could hear him crying
over and over again: ‘She’s gone, Trisha. She’s gone” (p. 77).
She then adds: “After Gerry rang off, Trisha
and Sandy called the Foreign Office in London, the British Consul in the
Algarve, and the British Embassy in London, requesting assistance”.
No time is given for this, but it must have
been close to midnight, as Kate she then writes (p. 77): “At 11.52pm, Gerry
spoke to my uncle Brian and Auntie Janet in Rothley at my request…Brian then
got in touch with the duty officer at the Foreign Office in London”.
Now this all conflicts with the Foreign
Office’s FOI Act statement. The Foreign
Office say they were first informed at 00.30am, but Kate says that both Sandy Cameron and Uncle Brian in Rothley
‘phoned the Foreign Office before midnight – yet the Foreign Office makes no
mention of these two calls.
Further information about this comes much
later in a report by the National Police Intelligence Agency (NPIA)t de-briefing report, which
included their version of
Events. Link:
http://library.college.police.uk/docs/npia/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf)
On page 13, in a section headed ‘The Initial
Response’, we read:
"The first report to a UK agency in
relation to the McCann case was made
on 3 May 2007, in a call to the FCO duty officer in Portugal from the
operator
of the holiday resort where the family were staying.
The duty
officer informed the FCO in London on the
same day, by which time a member
of the
McCann family had also made contact with the FCO".
So now we get a direct admission by NPIA that
a member of the McCann family (presumably Sandy Camron or uncle Brain Kennedy)
had contacted the Foreign Office before
the call from the Ocean Club.
There
was a call from the Ocean Club which began at 11:57:48secs, but the call was not to the usual telephone number of
the Consul in Portimao. Possibly it was to a different, out-of-hours special
number. There was a call from the Ocean Club to the Consulate’s usual telephone
number on the Friday, at 14:04:30 in the
afternoon, link: https://h42a.wordpress.com/2017/02/21/other-call-records-pt-3/
The Correio
da Manhã story insists that the call from Ambassador Buck came through to
Alipio Ribeira at about 11.00pm,
though – nearly an hour or so before the calls from Sandy Cameron or Brian
Kennedy and the Ocean Club.
So how did he know at 11.00pm? How did he
know by around 11.00pm that this incident required the National Director of the
PJ to be disturbed at dinner?
One poster on CMOMM, ‘rogue-a-tory’ summed up
the discussion on this issue as follows: “I think your post confirms what many
people have theorised over the years - namely, that the mainstream media were teed
up ready to go on Thursday 3 May”.
But not just the mainstream media. Surely,
for Ambassador John Buck to have moved so swiftly as to alert Alipio Ribeira
during his dinner, he must have been briefed in advance. Did he know that
Madeleine was dead and that he was being used as part of a deliberate hoax on
police and public alike?
F The British Embassy recommended
Robert Murat as the translator
There is one further piece of evidence that
suggests that Ambassador John Buck did
have advance knowledge. And this comes in the form of an article by
Portuguese journalist Paulo Reis.
Back in 2007, he wrote this (Link: http://gazetadigitalmadeleinecase.blogspot.com/2007/12/murat-recommended-as-translator-by.html)
QUOTE
Staff
from Bill Henderson’s office suggested the name of Robert Murat as a reliable
translator who could be used in the police inquiry, in the days following
Madeleine McCann disappearance.
Murat was
already known among diplomatic staff, as he had letters of recommendation from
Norfolk Police, where he worked for Bernard Matthews, one of the largest
poultry farm companies in UK, which employs hundreds of Portuguese workers.
The fact that
Robert Murat has acted, before, as translator for Norfolk Police, and the
recommendation issued by Bill Henderson’s office, at the time the British
consul in Algarve, took police to accept the suggestion, according to PJ
[Portuguese Police] sources.
After
Murat was named a formal suspect, the police went through all translations he
had done, checking their accuracy, but no problem was found, according to the
same sources. Bill Henderson retired from his diplomatic post and went back to
the U.K. in August.
UNQUOTE
Robert Murat was on hand early in the morning
of Friday 4 May to help with the interpreting, and began work that very day. Was
this in fact set up in advance by the British Consul in Portimao? - or by
Ambassador John Buck himself? Did one of them speak to the PJ and recommend Murat? It seems
highly likely.
Murat had another, very different, version of how he came to be an official
interpreter. He said that a holidaymaker, Stephen Carpenter, just happened to
be strolling by his garden the morning of Friday 4 May. Murat pretended he knew
nothing about what had been going on in the resort, despite his later admission
to the police that he and his mother had heard all the police sirens the
previous night. Carpenter told him that a 3-year-old British girl had gone
missing. Straightaway Murat volunteered his services as a translator, and made
contact with the PJ at the Ocean Club a few minutes later.
It seems an unlikely cover story.
The evidence presented here strongly suggests,
then, that both the British Embassy in
Portugal, and well-placed senior staff in the British TV and print media, were
primed in advance about what had really happened to Madeleine. It is reasonable to suggest that the British
Ambassador had probably ben told exactly what had happened to Madeleine, and
was just waiting for a signal from the McCann camp on the Thursday evening to
get things moving - fast.
Again, the evidence presented here tends to
confirm the views of many that Madeleine died much earlier in the week, maybe
as early as Monday or even Sunday, and it tends to confirm that the
circumstances surrounding Madeleine’s death were so serious that it required
several arms of the government’s security and intelligence services to mount a
full-blown cover-up of what really happened to her.
Again, our evidence is consistent with the
suggestion made by Richard D. Hall in his latest Madeleine film: ‘Madeleine:
Why the Cover-Up?’, that Robert Murat may have been an MI5 intelligence asset, along
with SKY News’ Martin Brunt, and that he had been summoned on Monday 30 April
2017 to fly over to Portugal on the very next flight and help plan and execute
the cover-up.
G The British Ambassador and the
case of the McCanns washing their clothes
We will mention here one other item of interest concerning the British
Embassy’s involvement in the case: their assistance in helping the McCanns to ward
off any potential demand by the PJ to seize their clothes. Here is a short
article on the subject by well-respected Madeleine McCann researcher, Lizzie
Taylor (generally known on the internet as HideHo):
THE
WASHED CLOTHES - Ambassador John Buck and Consul Bill Henderson – turned the
investigator's attention away from the McCanns
(Date Posted: 03/05/2011 11:18 AM) Aimoo Madeleine
McCann
Also
on 5th May 2007, two days after the announcement of Madeleine's disappearance,
the police, according to Amaral, would commit an important error: "We were
busy checking all the leads that came from the Ambassador. Leads that were,
moreover, found to be false.
New
instructions from the regional national directorate of the PJ, given after the
intervention of two British diplomats – Ambassador John Buck and Consul Bill
Henderson – turned the investigator's attention away from the McCanns
Kate
and Gerry McCann, for the first and only time, went to hand in clothes to be
washed in the Ocean Club Complex laundry, including Madeleine's clothes, which
the inspectors only heard about two days later. Too late, according to Amaral
"At
the time we had not established exactly which clothes Gerry was wearing on the
night of the disappearance nor which clothes were handed in to be washed on 5th
May", says Gonçalo Amaral.
It
was by means of the statements by various members of staff from the complex, linked
to the laundry service, that the inspectors were to learn that the McCanns had
their children's clothes - those of Madeleine and also those of Sean and Amélie
- washed.
"That would never have happened without the intervention of Mark Warner and, in particular, of the Ambassador. They took advantage of the space we gave them, it was a mistake on our part", admits Goncalo Amaral.
"Last Saturday (05/05/2007) I received a bag of clothes brought in by Mark Warner staff, and was told expressly that these belonged to Madeleine's family – there was adult clothing (male and female) and children's clothing... ", states one of the laundry workers.
"Last Saturday (05/05/2007) I received a bag of clothes brought in by Mark Warner staff, and was told expressly that these belonged to Madeleine's family – there was adult clothing (male and female) and children's clothing... ", states one of the laundry workers.
Although the laundry worker only remembers a pink skirt belonging to Madeleine, she has no uncertainty in confirming that there were also other clothes belonging to the small British girl, which has also been confirmed to the police by other colleagues.
(thanks to Lizzy's Madeleine McCann Aimoo forum)
--------------------------
Main
article by John Whitehouse.
END OF PART TWO: APPENDIX FOLLOWS
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
PART THREE
APPENDIX: Ambassador John Buck, on the Kevin Halligen
Blogspot
Here we add an excellent timeline collected by the blogger "Winnower", who posted this timeline on the actions of Ambassador John Buck in the Madeleine McCann case on 11 January 2009. It's a great piece of research. We have bolded those items that seem of especial interest:
11/01/2009 Posted by
Winnower
JOHN BUCK
- TIMELINE
British
ambassador to Portugal from 2004 to 2007
Left
office the day after the McCanns were made arguidos.
Ambassador Buck drove from Lisbon to Praia da
Luz. (Distance is approximately 3 hours by car.)
Saturday May 5, 2007
Drove in from Lisbon "to be with the
family after they begged him for help."
Embassy spokesman said Buck was driving down
to do everything for the McCanns that he could.
Ambassador
Buck and 3 "family liaison officers from Leicestershire police” held a
private meeting with the McCanns "at the resort" on the afternoon of
May 5th.
Announced to reporters that 3 British police
agents had arrived from Leicestershire to help with the investigation. He
stated that the officers would act as a "liaison" between the McCanns
and Portuguese police and between the Portuguese and British police.
"..Mr. Buck was there to introduce the family liaison officers to the
McCanns..."
The 3
"family liaison officers were flown out "at the request of the
Foreign Commonwealth Office.
Leicestershire spokeswoman said the 3
officers were there "simply to assist the family" and were not going
to have anything to do with the investigation at this point.
Told reporters that the investigation had
been "intensive and extensive".
Reportedly
Ambassador Buck "accompanied the couple...during the search on May 5"
Reported to have been "...with the
family throughout their ordeal..."
Ambassador Buck's intervention was credited
by the McCann's family and friends as being the only reason that the search for
Madeleine was upgraded to a major investigation.
"Despite being convinced - for reasons
they have refused to make public - that Madeleine is still in the Algarve,
Interpol have been alerted about her disappearance and checks were being made
at every Portuguese port and airport."
Sunday May 6, 2007
Ambassador Buck attended church service
officiated by Father Jose Manuel Pacheco.
Monday May 7, 2007
Ambassador Buck apparently returned to Lisbon
(or elsewhere, as later articles stated that he RETURNED to the Algarve on
Tuesday May 8th.)
Tuesday May 8, 2007
Ambassador Buck traveled to the Algarve and
met the McCanns. Reports were that the meeting lasted an hour.
He gave a
television interview in which he said he had been in touch with Portuguese
ministers and the prime minister Jose Socrates, and
senior police chiefs who assured him everything possible was being done to
ensure the safe return of Madeleine. Buck said that he was making sure the
links between the British and Portuguese officers were working, after concerns
had begun to be expressed regarding the experience and expertise of the
Portuguese investigators.
He made a statement to the media announcing
the arrival of additional British experts
Said that investigators were in close touch
with Interpol and Europol
Said the McCanns were "very grateful for
their efforts"
Ambassador Buck was interviewed by the
Leicester Mercury. Quote: "As you know, I spent quite a lot of time
with the McCann family on Friday and over the weekend…I wanted to come down
today to see Kate and Gerry again and to continue to support our consular
staff, who have been working on this for a number of days."
Wednesday May 9, 2007
An email between Portimao and Lisbon of 9 May
2007 was the subject of a Freedom of Information (FOI) request asking for
Ambassador Buck's communications related to the McCanns. This email (or a
portion of it) was withheld based on "Personal Information" exemption:
Section 40 (2) and (3) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
Further
information emerged regarding the 2 additional experts Buck had announced on
Tuesday
May 8th.
Ambassador
Buck said they were "kidnapping experts" and had joined the 3 other
British investigators who had been in Portugal since Saturday
"...
two 'Cracker-style' criminal behaviour experts from Britain flew into the
Algarve yesterday to join investigators..."
They were
from CEOP and their dispatch had been organised by the British Foreign Office.
"A spokeswoman for the CEOP said the
move was unprecedented and had been organised by the Foreign Office."
Thursday May 10, 2007
A Foreign Commonwealth Office internal email
of 10 May 2007 (12a) was the subject of a Freedom of Information (FOI) request
asking for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the McCanns. This
email (or a portion of it) was withheld based on "International
relations" exemption: Section 27.1.a (1)Information is exempt information
if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice—( a)
relations between the United Kingdom and any other State
A Foreign Commonwealth Office internal email
of 10 May 2007 (13aa) was the subject of a Freedom of Information (FOI) request
asking for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the McCanns. This
email (or a portion of it) was withheld based on "International
relations" exemption: Section 27.1.a.(1)Information is exempt information
if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice—( a)
relations between the United Kingdom and any other State
Friday May 11, 2007
An email between the Foreign Commonwealth
Office and John Buck of 11 May 2007 was the subject of a Freedom of Information
(FOI) request asking for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the
McCanns. This email (or a portion of it) was withheld based on
"International relations" exemption: Section 27.1.a. (1)Information
is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be
likely to, prejudice—( a) relations between the United Kingdom and any other
State
An email between John Buck and the Foreign
Commonwealth Office of 11 May 2007 was the subject of a Freedom of Information
(FOI) request asking for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the
McCanns. This email (or a portion of it) was withheld based on
"International relations" exemption: Section 27.1.a. (1)Information
is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be
likely to, prejudice—( a) relations between the United Kingdom and any other
State
An internal Foreign Commonwealth Office email
of 11 May 2007 was the subject of a Freedom of Information (FOI) request asking
for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the McCanns. This email (or
a portion of it) was withheld based on "International relations"
exemption: Section 27.1.a.(1)Information is exempt information if its
disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice—( a)
relations between the United Kingdom and any other State
Monday May 14, 2007
Ambassador Buck present in Praia da Luz
Spoke to national chief of police in Lisbon
and chief investigating officer in the Algarve.
Thanked journalists for respecting the
McCann's privacy and said there were impressive resources allocated to the
investigation. Said the resources are primarily Portuguese but that there were
a number of British police officers working closely with their Portuguese
colleagues in the Algarve.
Arrived late for a scheduled news conference
and found journalists fleeing toward Casa Lilliana where a search was underway.
Tuesday May 15, 2007
An email between Lisbon and Foreign
Commonwealth Office of 15 May 2007 was the subject of a Freedom of Information
(FOI) request asking for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the
McCanns. This email (or a portion of it) was withheld based on
"International relations" exemption: Section 27.1.a.(1)Information is
exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely
to, prejudice—( a) relations between the United Kingdom and any other State
Wednesday May 16, 2007
A letter from John Buck to Foreign
Commonwealth Office of 16 May 2007 was the subject of a Freedom of Information
(FOI) request asking for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the McCanns.
This email (or a portion of it) was withheld based on "International
relations" exemption: Section 27.1.a.(1)Information is exempt information
if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice—( a)
relations between the United Kingdom and any other State
Thursday May 17, 2007
An internal document was sent by the Foreign
Office ordering British diplomats 'to avoid offering support' to Robert Murat
unless charges were presented against him." (Note: Murat was made an
arguido on May 15 and the Foreign Office internal memo was allegedly dated May
17.)
Tuesday May 22, 2007
An email between Portimao and Foreign
Commonwealth Office of 22 May 2007 was the subject of a Freedom of Information
(FOI) request asking for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the
McCanns. This email (or a portion of it) was withheld based on
"International relations" exemption: Section 27.1.a. (1)Information
is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be
likely to, prejudice—( a) relations between the United Kingdom and any other
State
Thursday May 24, 2007
An email between Portimao and Foreign
Commonwealth Office of 24 May 2007 was the subject of a Freedom of Information
(FOI) request asking for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the
McCanns. This email (or a portion of it) was withheld based on
"International relations" exemption: Section 27.1.a.(1)Information is
exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely
to, prejudice—( a) relations between the United Kingdom and any other State
Ambassador Buck, consular officials and
British police had an "informal" meeting with the McCanns "over
tea." Reports stated that the McCann's travel plans were up for
discussion. The following day Portuguese police issued a detailed description
of the "possible suspect".
Reports were that ""...The British
embassy duly applied pressure on the Portuguese authorities to find more
flexibility in their secrecy laws..."
Friday May 25, 2007
Ambassador Buck met again with the McCanns
and British police.
Portuguese police issued detailed description
of possible abductor.
Sunday May 27, 2007
News emerged that the McCanns had held discussions with Gordon Brown
Personal
intervention of Gordon Brown was reported. Gordon Brown was reported to have
urged police to give more public details after the McCanns voiced their concern
about the lack of disclosure by Portuguese detectives.
June 18, 2007
A Foreign Commonwealth Office internal email
of 18 June 2007 was the subject of a Freedom of Information (FOI) request
asking for Ambassador Buck's communications related to the McCanns. This
email (or a portion of it) was withheld based on "International
relations" exemption: Section 27.1.a.(1)Information is exempt information
if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice—( a)
relations between the United Kingdom and any other State
June 19, 2007
An email between John Buck and Foreign
Commonwealth Office (FCO)/ Portimao of 19 June 2007 was the subject of a
Freedom of Information (FOI) request asking for Ambassador Buck's
communications related to the McCanns. This email (or a portion of it) was
withheld based on "International relations" exemption: Section
27.1.a.(1)Information is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act
would, or would be likely to, prejudice—( a) relations between the United
Kingdom and any other State
June 21, 2007
An email between Foreign Commonwealth Office
(FCO) and Foreign Commonwealth Office (FCO)/ Lisbon of 21 June 2007 (19b) was
the subject of a Freedom of Information (FOI) request asking for Ambassador
Buck's communications related to the McCanns. This email (or a portion of
it) was withheld based on "Personal Information" exemption: Section
40 (2) and (3) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.
September 10, 2007
Ambassador
John Buck was replaced as the British Ambassador to Portugal by Alexander
Ellis. It was announced that Buck had "left the diplomatic
service".
The press
release stated that Mr. Ellis would take up this appointment with
"immediate effect."
October 2007
In October 2007 an individual made an FOI
request (under the Freedom of Information Act 2000) to the Foreign and
Commonwealth Office (FCO) for information concerning communications between the
then Ambassador to Portugal John Buck and the Portuguese police on the subject
of the disappearance of the child Madeleine McCann. Reference:
FS50188322.
Some information was released straight away
and some information was withheld.
Since that time the Foreign Office released
"most" but not all of the requested information. (Withheld
information noted above.)
The Information Commissioner's Office
reviewed the matter and in March 2009 decided that the Foreign Office had
complied with section 1(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act but had
breeched section 1(1)(b) of the Act by failing to provide the information
within the specified time limit.
The commissioner upheld the Foreign Office
decision to withold some information, stating that the public interested in
withholding the information outweighed the public interest in disclosing the
information. The ICO also decided that personal information withheld was done
so correctly.
December 3, 2007
A memo was leaked to the Belgian newspaper La
Dernière Heure regarding a diplomat's concerns about the case.
Questions have been raised as to whether the
memo may have been written by Ambassador Buck or someone in his office,
although diplomat's name was not published in the newspaper articles.
The leaked memo was routed through the
British diplomatic mission in Brussels
The leaked memo was sent "just
days" after Madeleine disappeared.
The
leaked memo warned the Foreign Office of concerns regarding the McCanns and
warned of the risks of siding with the McCanns in public.
The
diplomat immediately had doubts after being sent to Praia da Luz due to what he
considered to be inconsistencies in their testimonies and "confused
declarations" as to the whereabouts of the McCanns and their friends on
May 3.
The memo
mentions instructions "from London" that consular staff
"overstretch their authority and put pressure on Portuguese
authorities."
The memo
refers to orders sent the previous day from the Foreign Office in London
commanding embassy staff to provide all possible assistance to the McCanns and
that the McCanns "had to be "accompanied at all times during any
contact with the Portuguese police" by a member of consular staff or by
British police officers sent out from the UK.
He also mentioned their lack of cooperation
with the Portuguese police
The memo was sent *from the Algarve* to the
Foreign office days after Madeleine "went missing"
Quote:
"With the greatest respect, I would like to make you aware of the risks
and implications to our relationship with the Portuguese authorities, if you
consider the possible involvement of the couple. Please confirm to me, in the
light of these concerns, that we want to continue to be closely involved in the
case as was requested in your previous message."
The Belgian report also stated that
Portuguese detectives believe it is possible Madeleine died as the result of an
accident on May 3 in the family's holiday apartment and that her parents hid
and later disposed of her body with the help of their friends.
They said
it is highly significant that almost all of the diplomats involved at the
outset have now been taken off the case.
December 12, 2007
Reports emerged that British diplomats had
been ordered by the Foreign Office to "avoid offering support" to
Robert Murat.
The claim was made that an internal Foreign
Office memo had sent the instructions three days after Murat was made an
arguido (Note: May 15 is the date Murat was made an arguido.)
According to Spain's El Mundo newspaper, the
order was justified due to the "specific nature of the case".
The internal memo allegedly stated that
British diplomats were to "avoid offering support" to Murat unless
charges were pressed against him.