Total Pageviews

Sunday 29 April 2018

Portuguese Attorney-General passes MMRG 'Death on Sunday 29 April 2007' evidence to PJ in Faro for action

Tomorrow will be Sunday 29th April, 11 years to the day since the day MMRG - and now many others - suggest that Madeleine died.

The MMRG letter, with its dossier of evidence (, has now been sent for action to the Attorney-General's office in Faro - see a scan of the letter below. No doubt the PJ will be following up this evidence. MMRG have announced that they will be forwarding further evidence in support of their hypothesis to the Portuguese Attorney-General in due course

Here is MMRG's report:

Portuguese Attorney-General passes new evidence about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, from the Madeleine McCann Research Group, to the Attorney-General in Faro

by the Madeleine McCann Research Group, 23 April 2018

On 6 March 2008, members of the Madeleine McCann Research Group (MMRG) wrote to the Portuguese Attorney-General, Dra Joana Marques Vidal, enclosing a dossier of evidence concerning the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. It included links to 47 articles or documentaries where further information could be obtained.

The Portuguese police investigation into Madeleine McCann was archived in July 2008, pending the receipt of ‘new and credible evidence’ which might lead to the investigation being recommenced and possibly to the arrest of any person responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance. Our dossier contained several lines of evidence which suggested not only that Madeleine died her parents’ apartment but also that she may have died as early as Sunday that week (29 April 2007).

On 28 March, the Head of Cabinet for the Attorney-General, Helena Goncalves, replied, stating that the case had been referred to the Chief Magistrate in Faro for further investigation. It should be noted that, unlike in Britain, the Portuguese police, the Policia Judiciara, do not undertake investigations on their own initiative but are authorised to do so by the Attorney-General’s Department, which in turn refers local organisations to the local Chief Magistrate.

The translation of the letter from Helena Goncalves (see below) is as follows:


“re: The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann

Acting on a higher order, I am writing to acknowledge the request of the document presented by your Excellency on behalf of the research group on the Madeleine McCann case, and to inform that it was now been forwarded to the Honorable Member, the Chief Magistrate of the Co-ordinator for the Ministry of the Public for the Faro District County”.


Our original letter was translated by Paulo Reis, the Portuguese journalist who took a major interest in the case and published many well-researched articles on the case between 2007 and 2009. Our letter, in both English and Portuguese, is on his website.

He has now provided us with detailed information about the so-called current Portuguese police investigation. With his permission, we are able to say this, quote Paulo:

“It is true that the Policia Judiciara did re-open their investigation in 2013 after the Operation Grange review became a formal investigation. This was done mainly to comply with the request of the British police, who claimed they had ‘dozens’ of new ‘lines of enquiry’. But in fact, a review of the files had already been ordered before 2013 by the Attorney-General. She established a special team of 8-10 PJ officers, headed by a ‘top’ Criminal Investigation Coordinator in Oporto.

“But the investigation re-opening was what we call a ‘soft reopening’. The case remained in the hands of Criminal Judge of Portimão Judicial Circuit (it's the third-tier investigative body in our judicial system. You have the Attorney-General, then the PJ, and then you a Criminal Judge who directs the cases, the Attorney-General and the PJ are finished with them. Then we also have the Court Judges, who try the cases).

“Now there is a team of 8-10 PJ officers from Faro working with Operation Grange. It’s what we call a ‘small’ team, with no extra manpower and/or budget assigned to it.

“In the Attorney-General’s Department we have a special department called DCIAP in Portuguese – the Central Criminal Investigation Department. It's directed by the Attorney-General and deals with major criminal cases. They always get the money, resources and the people they ask for. It was the DCIAP that pursued the investigation into corruption allegations against former Prime Minister Jose Socrates. The case against him is still ongoing.

“It’s an interesting question as to why Maddie's case was not assigned to the DCIAP in 2013. It maybe because the Attorney-General and her staff do not think the case requires the help of DCIAP. The story of the claimed abduction obviously “has no legs to walk”, as we say in Portuguese.

“So the case was instead sent case back to Portimão, where the investigation goes on”.

We thank Paulo Reis most warmly for all his help. We will shortly be sending a further dossier to the Attorney-General.



For those not yet familiar with the arguments that Madeleine may have died late on Sunday, please view or read the following:

1 Richard D Hall’s third Madeleine McCann film: When Madeleine Died?

2 Richard Hall’s fifth Madeleine McCann film: Madeleine: Why the Cover-Up?

3 “What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann”, by ‘PeterMac’ (retired British Police Superintendent), especially chapters 14, 15, 21 and 22

4 The original letter from MMRG to the Portuguese Attorney-General, viewable on Paulo Reis’s blog, here:

5 “Was Madeleine Seen after Sunday? – No Credible Evidence that she was” by Lizzy Taylor (HideHo)

6 “Could something have happened to Madeleine earlier in the week”, by Lizzy Taylor (HideHo) [article from 2012]

7 “The SIX photos that provide the biggest clue to when Madeleine died”,

posted on CMOMM

8 “A Nightwear Job”, by Dr Martin Roberts, posted on CMOMM

9 “Planning the abduction hoax: Was it done over four days or four hours?”, by MMRG, on CMOMM

10 “What really happened to Madeleine McCann: Was she killed on Sunday 29thh April?”, posted on CMOMM

11 “Madeleine McCann could not have died from an accident, nor from anything else, after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007”, posted on CMOMM

MMRG, 23 April 2018

Sunday 18 March 2018

Letter from a group of British investigators to the Portuguese Public Prosecutor, about the Madeleine McCann Case


From: The Madeleine McCann Research Group
28 February 2018
To: Exma Sra. Procuradora-Geral da República,
Drª Joana Marques Vidal
Rua da Escola Politécnica, 140
1269-269 LISBOA

Dear Drª Joana Marques VidalTo:

re: The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: New evidence of what happened to her

We are a group of mainly British researchers. Most of us have studied the disappearance of Madeleine McCann in depth for the past 10 years. Our members and researchers include many people with professional expertise, such as ex-police officers, lawyers, photographers, computer experts and statement analysts.

On 10 September 2007, Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida, on behalf of the Policia Judiciara, produced an interim (‘intercalary’) report summarising the police’s case against Madeleine’s parents, Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann (6):

The conclusions in Tavares de Almeida’s report

This is an English translation of the conclusions reached by the PJ’s investigation up to and including 10 September 2007:


From everything that we have discovered, our files result in the following conclusions:

A. the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007

B. a simulation - a staged hoax - of an abduction took place

C. in order to render the child’s death impossible before 10.00pm, a situation of checking of the McCann couple’s children while they slept was concocted

D. Dr Gerald McCann and Dr Kate McCann are involved in the concealment of the corpse of their daughter, Madeleine McCann

E. at this moment, there seems to be no strong indications that the child’s death was other than the result of a tragic accident, yet;

F. from what has been established up to now, everything indicates that the McCann couple, in self-defence, did not want to deliver up Madeleine’s corpse immediately and voluntarily, and there is a strong possibility therefore that it was moved from the initial place where she died. This situation may raise questions concerning the circumstances in which the death of the child took place.

G. Therefore, we suggest that the case files are sent to the Republic’s Prosecutor, in the Lagos legal district, for:

1) possible new questioning of the arguidos Dr Gerald and Dr Kate McCann, and
2) an evaluation of the measure of restraint to be applied in this case.

During the house search at the McCann couple’s residence, a diary style manuscript was found, already photocopied, possibly authored by Dr Kate McCann; admitting that it may contain information that may help to reach the material truth of facts.

We therefore propose that the photocopies of the said document are presented to the illustrious judge for the purpose of its apprehension (if legal), its translation and eventual collection of information to be included in the files, as necessary for the investigation.

At this date, I submit the case files for your appreciation, for you to determine whatever you may see as convenient.

10 September 2007 Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida


The research that we have undertaken – and that of many others both here, in Portugal, and elsewhere – leads us to support all of the above conclusions in Tavares de Almeida’s report – except for one.

We noted that when the report of the Policia Judiciara was archived in July 2007, it was said that the case would be re-opened if ‘new and credible evidence’ was received by the Portuguese authorities. The case was re-opened in the PJ’s Oporto office in 2013. Our letter contains evidence which we believe they should see and act on.

As a result of painstaking research by many people, we believe that we are now in a position to supply you with new and credible evidence on one matter (the date of death) covered in the first point of Tavares de Almeida’s report, namely: “Conclusion A. the minor Madeleine McCann died in Apartment 5A at the Ocean Club resort in Praia da Luz, on the night of 3 May 2007”.

We are satisfied that we can now provide sufficient evidence to show that the minor Madeleine McCann died not on the night of Thursday 3rd May, but instead died between Sunday afternoon (29th April) and Monday afternoon (30th April).

The remainder of this letter sets out in brief summary the evidence which we suggest points clearly to Madeleine having died on the Sunday or Monday that week. We will present the evidence under these seven headings:

A large number of false statements were made at the outset, containing a huge amount of fabricated evidence. These added credibility to the McCanns’ claim that Madeleine had been abducted on Thursday 3 May. They diverted the PJ investigation into believing that Madeleine was still alive that day.

The photograph of Madeleine McCann, Dr Gerry McCann and Amelie, taken by the Ocean Club pool.

The absence of photographs of Madeleine taken after Sunday. (7)

The fabricated statement of Nuno Lourenco, who tried to identify Wojchiech Krokowski as a potential child-kidnapper who had tried to abduct his daughter on Sagres beach. (3) (8) (9) (10) (11)

The unreliable evidence of the children’s nanny (and McCann family friend), Catriona Baker, Dr Gerry McCann and Dr Kate McCann about an alleged ‘high tea’ at the Ocean Club Tapas restaurant, at about 5pm to 6pm on Thursday 3 May. (12)

The lack of any credible, independent evidence by anybody that Madeleine McCann was seen alive after Sunday 29th April. (7) (13)

The mystery of the strange ‘Make-Up Photo’ of Madeleine, which appears to have been taken on Sunday 29th April, (5) (14) (15) and

Clear photographic evidence that the very same pyjamas Madeleine had with her on holiday in Praia da Luz were later held up by the McCanns at two press conferences, one in London on 5th June 2007, the other in Amsterdam, Holland, on 7th June 2007. (16) (17)

In presenting our evidence, we wish to emphasise that we are in no way critical of the PJ investigation. On the contrary, we believe it was diligently and brilliantly pursued in almost impossible circumstances, namely the determination of the British government and media to insist that Madeleine had been abducted. It is our case that the abduction hoax was skillfully crafted over a period of four days, and was so designed as to deliberately mislead the PJ. Only after years of patiently unravelling the evidence and exposing the deceit has it been possible to arrive at our conclusion that Madeleine was probably dead 3 to 4 days before Thursday 3 May.

Before detailing our evidence on these points, we would like to make the following observations on the conclusions of Tavares de Almeida and of Dr Gonçalo Amaral in his book, A Verdada da Mentira, ‘The Truth of the Lie’. (18)

The PJ’s evidence about the alleged ‘high tea’ with Madeleine and her parents on the afternoon of Thursday 3 May

In Tavares de Almeida’s report (6), he states the following about the events of the evening of Thursday 3 May:


“But there is another question about the timing which is this: The last time that the child was seen outside of the group, by someone who can prove they saw her, was at around 5.35pm, when the parents went to pick her up at the crèche.

“This may widen the time lapse between Madeleine’s ‘disappearance’ and the alarm being raised into more than four hours”.


This is paralleled by two short passages in Goncalo Amaral’s book ‘The Truth of the Lie’. Here is an English translation (by Anna Silvestro) of the relevant paragraphs (18):


(1st passage) “On the fateful day of May 3rd, the attendance register at the play centre indicates that Madeleine arrived at 9.10, accompanied by her father. Her mother came to fetch her at 12.25 for lunch and took her back at 2 o'clock. After jogging on the beach and going to fetch the twins, she collected Maddie at 5.30pm. From that moment on, no other person saw the little girl, apart from her parents and their friends. What happened then in the apartment remains a mystery”.


“We finally decide to question [Kate McCann[ as a witness, but not to pose questions on the events after 5.30pm, the time at which she returned to the apartment with her three children.


“It is now important to present a summary of this case, based on our deductions: reject what is false, throw out what we can't show with sufficient certainty and validate that which can be proven. Point 5. The body, the existence of which has been confirmed by the EVRD and CSI dogs, but also by the results of the preliminary laboratory analyses, cannot be found. The conclusions my team and I have arrived at are the following:
1. The minor, Madeleine McCann died inside apartment 5A of the Ocean Club in Vila da Luz, on the night of May 3rd 2007;
2. Kate Healy and Gerald McCann were probably involved in the concealment of their daughter's body.
3. The death may have occurred as a result of a tragic accident…”


We will present evidence that Madeleine was not present at that ‘high tea’, (4) (13) that the ‘high tea’ never happened, and that there is no credible, independent evidence that Madeleine was seen alive after lunchtime on Sunday 29th April. (4) (13)

The two descriptions of an abductor by Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco

We will also make observations on another matter. That is the descriptions given of an abductor to the PJ by the McCanns’ friend, Jane Tanner, during Friday, 4th May, and a second description of a child kidnapper by Nuno Lourenco, early the following day (Saturday 5th November).

This is what Tavares de Almeida says about the claims of Jane Tanner (6):


“Later, during the course of the morning of May 4th, the father gives the same brief description [as Jane Tanner did] and refers back to Jane for additional details. The latter [Jane tanner] appears at the offices of the Policia Judiciara in Portimão at 11.30am. This time, the description is very precise:
the individual, aged between 35 and 40, was thin and 1.70m tall;
his hair was dark brown, falling over his collar;
he was wearing cream or beige trousers, probably linen,
a sort of anorak - but not very thick –
and black shoes, classic in style.
He was walking hurriedly, with a child in his arms. He was warmly dressed, the reason she thought he was not a tourist. The child appeared to be asleep - she only saw the legs - had bare feet and was dressed in pyjamas, which were obviously cotton, light-coloured, probably white or pale pink, with a pattern - flowers maybe, but she isn't certain. Concerning the man, she states that she would recognise him from the back by his particular way of walking. The importance of this statement will be seen later”.


Now we come to a description of a man given by Nuno Lourenco to the PJ on the morning of Saturday 5th May (8) (9) (10). He said this man tried to kidnap his daughter outside a café in the village of Sagres, on Sunday 30th April (8). As we now know from the PJ’s investigations during that Saturday, they identified the man as Wojchiech Krokowski, (9) (10) (18) a Polish man who was on holiday in Praia da Luz in the very same week that the McCanns were also staying there. This is what Gonçalo Amaral says in his book about Nuno Lourenco’s claims (18):


“From information from Sagres, we learn that an individual has been surprised on Mareta beach taking photos of several children and in particular of a little girl aged 4, blonde with blue eyes, who looks like Madeleine. It was the little girl's father who noticed him. This 40 year-old man, wearing glasses, tells the investigators that the photographer tried to kidnap his daughter in the afternoon of April 26th in Sagres.

“He allegedly then fled in a hired car with a woman in the passenger seat. The stranger did not look like a tourist; brown hair down to his collar, wearing cream-coloured trousers and jacket and shoes of a classic style. This report reminds us of the individual encountered by Jane Tanner in the streets of Vila da Luz on the evening of Madeleine's disappearance.

“Thanks to the father's composure, he managed to take a photograph of the vehicle. It's not very clear and does not allow us to make out the number plate, but we succeed, nonetheless, in finding the car. The car hire firm provides us with the identity of the driver. He is a forty-year-old Polish man, who is traveling with his wife. They arrived in Portugal on April 28th, from Berlin. At Faro airport, they hired a car and were put up in an apartment in Budens, near Praia da Luz. Unfortunately, on May 5th, at 7am, they had already left, taking with them their camera and all the photos from their holiday. We ask the German police, through Interpol, to monitor them as soon as they arrive in Berlin. All the passengers are questioned, but no one has seen a child looking like Madeleine. In Berlin, the couple take the train to return to Poland. Thus, the Polish trail comes to an end. We would like to have seen their photos...but that proved impossible”.


As can be clearly seen, Gonçalo Amaral and his team of PJ detectives clearly believed that the man seen by Nuno Lourenco at Sagres on Sunday 30th April was the same man that Jane Tanner had seen at around 9.15pm on Thursday 3rd May (19) (20)near the McCanns’ apartment. All the following descriptions were identical:
age of the man (35-40, or 40)
hair brown or dark brown
hair ‘down to’ or ‘falling over’ his collar
cream-coloured trousers
‘jacket’ or ‘anorak’
-shoes of a classic style
“didn’t look like a tourist” (because of wearing ‘warm clothes’).

In this letter we will present evidence that:
Nuno Lourenco’s statement was a complete fabrication
Jane Tanner’s statement was also a complete fabrication
The descriptions given were so similar that they provide the strongest possible evidence that they were planned well before Thursday, and
There was collusion between Jane Tanner, Nuno Lourenco and others to fake the existence of an abductor (3) (9) (10).

EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 1. A large number of false statements were made at the outset, containing a huge amount of fabricated evidence. These added credibility to the McCanns’ claim that Madeleine had been abducted on Thursday 3 May. They diverted the PJ investigation into believing that Madeleine was still alive that day.

As the PJ concluded, we agree that a hoax abduction was ‘staged’. We also agree that the furniture in the McCanns’ apartment was pre-arranged on Thursday 3 May to fake an abduction scenario. All this needed the co-operation of the McCanns and all of their Tapas 7 friends.

We also entirely agree with the PJ’s evidence (see Tavares de Almeida’s report) that there were:
multiple contradictions between the evidence of the witnesses
multiple changes of story by the chief witnesses, and
that the McCanns would adapt their narrative as new embarrassing facts emerged.

In fact much more evidence of these contradictions and changes of story has emerged since Gonçalo Amaral was removed from the PJ investigation on 2 October 2007. To take one example from Gonçalo Amaral’s book; he correctly identified that the accounts of Dr David Payne visiting Kate McCann in Apartment 5A were contradictory. We have since discovered a total of at least 20 contradictions as between their two versions of what happened. (21) We hold that this is more than sufficient to prove that the alleged ‘visit’ was fabricated.

Three individuals in particular led the PJ investigation and Gonçalo Amaral to conclude that Madeleine must have died after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May: Jane Tanner, Nuno Lourenco and Catriona Baker, the children’s nanny.

We deal with the evidence of Nuno Lourenco and Catriona Baker below. Here we summarise why the evidence of Jane Tanner should be treated as wholly unreliable – as the PJ team itself soon recognised:

She and her husband Russell O’Brien were close friends of the McCanns. That means she is not an independent witness
On Sunday 13 May she was adamant that the man she claimed to have seen, carrying a bundle or a child, at around 9.15pm on Thursday 3 May, was Robert Murat. This identification of him by Jane Tanner was a major reason why Murat was pulled in for questioning two days later (18)
It has since become clear that in the hours before she was placed in a police van by the PJ, in order to see if she could identify the man she claimed to have seen, she was spoken to by a senior Leicestershire police officer, Detective Chief Superintendent Bob Small, and two staff from the British government-funded security agency, Control Risks Group (22). It is reasonable to suspect that these three people influenced Jane Tanner to make a false claim that she ‘recognised’ Robert Murat
In his book on the case, Goncalo Amaral refers to the sudden arrival in Portugal of large numbers of British government, police and security personnel – staff from the Foreign Office, the British Embassy, Leicestershire Police, Scotland Yard, MI5, Special Branch, the National Police Improvement Agency, CEOP and Control Risks Group. Amaral records in his book the following (18):



“Since Murat's first interview, which they attended, the specialists have continued to refine the profile of the suspect [Robert Murat]…according to the English profilers, there is a 90% chance that he is the guilty party…”


From all the above, we say there is clear evidence of a plot to ‘frame’ Robert Murat and persuade the PJ to question him and make him a formal suspect, an ‘arguido’. And this is exactly what happened on Tuesday 15 May (18).
In October 2007, the McCann Team released an artist’s sketch of the man said to have been seen by Jane Tanner. It was drawn up by a ‘forensic artist’, Melissa Little. She was employed by Cheshire businessman, Brian Kennedy, who directed the McCann Team’s highly controversial private investigation. The sketch did not look like Robert Murat.
Later, in January 2008, there was a major news story in the British press about a man with ‘straggly hair’ and a moustache, said by both the McCann Team and Leicestershire Police to be a new ‘chief suspect’. (20) (21) (22) (23) The McCanns’ PR agent, Clarence Mitchell (who at the time of Madeleine’s disappearance was the head of the British government’s Media Monitoring Unit), held a special ‘police-style press conference’ to promote this new suspect. Once again, Melissa Little drew the artist’s sketch that was presented to the media. In some respects, the sketch resembled the earlier sketch drawn up by Jane Tanner. Jane Tanner was quoted in the British press as saying she was ‘80% sure’ that the man she said she had seen on 3 May was the same as the man with the straggly hair and the moustache. This was despite the facts that (a) she frankly admitted that she had never seen the face of the man on 3 May and (b) the man with the straggly hair and the moustache looked nothing like Robert Murat.
Also in January 2008, Jane Tanner admitted that she was ‘no longer sure’ that the man she had seen on 3 May was Robert Murat (29) (30) (31).
This admission was important because, in the two days after Robert Murat was made a formal suspect, three friends of the McCanns (Fiona Payne, Russell O’Brien and Rachael Oldfield) all made statements to the PJ claiming that they had seen Robert Murat near the McCanns’ apartment on the night of 3 May. Yet eight months later (January 2008), they admitted that they might have been ‘mistaken’. (18)
10. One more indication that Jane Tanner’s claims were false came in a press conference held by the McCann Team in August 2009 (28). This conference was held in order to promote the McCanns’ latest theory, that Madeleine had been abducted by a woman, on a yacht bound from Barcelona to Australia. In order to promote this theory, the McCanns’ latest chief private investigator, former Detective Sergeant, Dave Edgar, said that Jane Tanner might have been mistaken and that she saw a female carrying a child, not a male.
11. Finally, we add that on 14 October 2013, around 7 million people in Britain watched a TV programme about Madeleine’s disappearance, made by the BBC together with the Metropolitan Police (27). They had together spent over £2 million making this film. In the film, the Metropolitan Police chief investigator, Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood, said that the man seen by Jane Tanner had ‘come forward’. He told us that the man’s daughter had been in the ‘night creche’ on 3 May and that he had carried his daughter, clad only in her pyjamas, back to wherever he was staying that night.
12. There were many reasons to doubt DCI Redwood’s claims (27), for example:
why had this man kept silent for 6 years?
if the man had been walking past the McCanns’ apartment that night from the crèche, maps showed that he was not taking the direct route from the crèche but must have gone a longer way around
we were not given the identity of the man; only a blurred photograph, said to be of this man, was shown
we were told that (i) he had been wearing exactly the same sort of clothes on holiday as those described by Jane Tanner (ii) his daughter had been wearing very similar pyjamas to those worn by Madeleine on that holiday and (iii) that he had for some unknown reason kept these very pyjamas for 6 years
there is no explanation of (i) where the mother of this child was whilst the man was carrying her home in the dark on a cold evening (only 13 deg C) (ii) why he was not using a buggy and (iii) why his daughter was only in pyjamas, with no covering over her.
In short, none of the dozens of serious Madeleine McCann researchers in Britain believes that DCI Redwood was telling the truth. We believe it was yet another lie by the British police to continue the claim that Madeleine was abducted, when she was not.

EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 2. The photograph of Madeleine McCann, Dr Gerry McCann and Amelie, taken by the Ocean Club pool

One of the most famous photographs of Madeleine is one of her, her sister Amelie, and her father Dr Gerry McCann, sitting by the Ocean Club pool. They said that this photograph was taken by her mother, Dr Kate McCann, on the last day of their holiday, Thursday 3rd May, at about 2.29pm.

We will present a summary of evidence below which suggests that this was a deliberate lie by the McCanns and by those supporting them (4) (32) (33) (34) . We will show that this photograph was almost certainly taken on Sunday, 29th April at lunch-time. (4) (33) We will also show that this was the last photograph of Madeleine ever taken, with the possible exception of what we will call the ‘Make-Up Photo’ - see below (14) (15). Further, we will show that there is no credible, truly independent evidence that Madeleine was alive after the afternoon of Sunday 29th April (13). From these conclusions we will also suggest that it is unlikely that Madeleine’s death was ‘accidental’ (as suggested in the PJ’s report) and we will also suggest that Madeleine’s parents had professional help from the highest levels of the British government in order to ‘stage’ an abduction (the PJ’s own conclusion) and to help keep up the ‘myth’ of Madeleine being abducted for over 10 years (2) (4) (5).

The specific evidence relating to the ‘Last Photo’ is as follows:

The photograph is said to have been taken by Kate McCann. Two acknowledged experts in digital photography have examined this photograph in detail and both, independently, agreed that it was a genuine photograph with no signs of alteration or ‘photoshopping’ (33)
The experts also pointed out, however, that it was a relatively simple matter to change the date and time stamp, to try to prove that a photograph was taken on a different date from the actual date (33)
On 9 May, Dr Gerry McCann and a close relative, Michael Wright, presented to the PJ two computer disks which purported to show all the photos taken on the holiday by the McCanns and their friends, the Paynes. These disks included three photographs of Madeleine happily playing in the Ocean Club playground on the first day of the holiday (Saturday 28th April). But for reasons which have not been explained by the McCanns, these two disks did not include the ‘Last Photo’. (4)
Furthermore, it is clear from the PJ files that the two computer disks of photos were compiled with the additional help of Alex Woolfall, the Head of Risk, employed by the huge PR firm, Bell Pottinger. He has admitted this. It is unclear why the ‘Head of Risk’ at a major public relations firm should need to sort through the McCanns’ holiday photographs (4) (33) [NOTE: We add here the following information: 1. Sir Tim Bell, former Chairman of Bell Pottinger, admitted that the McCanns paid him over £600,000 to ‘keep their name on the newspaper front pages for a year’, and 2. This year, Bell Pottinger collapsed, and is now ‘in administration’, following revelations about a campaign of lies they conducted in South Africa to back up the discredited President, Jacob Zuma. The firm, and those who run it, have been totally discredited. Bell Pottinger also received huge payments from various corrupt regimes and individuals they worked for in different parts of the world]
The weather when the photo was taken This is a crucial evidential point that the PJ had no opportunity to consider. At lunch-time on Thursday 3 May, the weather was cloudy and cool (17 deg C). This can be demonstrated from assorted weather records and photographs. By contrast, the weather on Sunday lunchtime (29th April) was sunny and very warm (21 deg C). By Monday, a cold front had already brought cooler and cloudier weather with some rain. This lasted until Friday (4) (33).
Now we need to look at the evidence of the photo itself. This is what we observe:
bright sunshine
no evidence of any wind
three people sitting by the pool, dipping their feet in the pool
Dr Gerry McCann wearing T-shirt and shorts
Madeleine and Amelia wearing light clothing
Madeleine and Amelie both wearing sun-hats
a sheen of perspiration on Gerry McCann’s forehead
Gerry McCann wearing sunglasses (4) (33).
None of these features match the claim that this photograph was taken on Thursday 3rd May. They all match, however, with the only sunny and warm day of the holiday: Sunday 29th April.
The photograph was not produced by the McCanns until Thursday 24 May. Why, when it was already in the McCanns’ camera, was it not produced straightaway, when the police and the press required the most up-to-date photo of Madeleine?

EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 3. The absence of photographs of Madeleine taken after Sunday.

Only five photographs of Madeleine on that holiday are claimed to exist.

We have mentioned four of them:
There were three photographs of Madeleine taken on the Saturday. Dr Gerry McCann handed these to the PJ on 9 May 2007
There is the ‘Last Photo’, which the McCanns say was taken on Thursday 3rd May. However, we have shown that it must have been taken on Sunday 29th April.

That leaves just one other photo which the McCanns claim was taken on that holiday: the so-called ‘Tennis Balls Photo’, which purports to show Madeleine clutching some tennis balls.

There are numerous problems with this photo (35) (36 (37). The main four are:

Two different people are said to have taken it (Kate McCann and Jane Tanner)
They claim they were taken on two different days (Tuesday and Thursday), and
The improbability of Kate McCann’s account (in her 2011 book, ‘madeleine’) of how the photograph came to be taken (she writes of how she ran back to her apartment to get her camera, while Madeleine was apparently there, waiting for this photograph to be taken
The photograph appears inconsistent with what is said by Kate McCann. There are no other children in shot. There are no children’s nannies or tennis coaches in shot, the balls that the girl in the photo is holding are adult balls, not the soft balls that children would use when playing mini-tennis.

Furthermore, there is no independent witness (such as a crèche nanny or tennis coach) of how and when this photograph is supposed to have been taken.

In addition, some observers have noted that whilst the head of the girl in the photograph is clearly that of Madeleine, the body of the girl looks different from Madeleine in a number of ways. Notably the girls’ legs look sturdier, as if they are of an older girl, and her arms and legs have a number of marks, possibly bruises and scratches, and look red and sunburnt when compared with the pale skin of Madeleine, as seen on the three photographs of Madeleine on Saturday, and the ‘Last Photo’ which we are sure was taken on the Sunday. (4) (35) (36) (37)

Therefore we have no proof of any photograph of Madeleine being taken on the Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday or Thursday that week. That is wholly consistent with our case that Madeleine died on the Sunday.

We should add that a Mr Philip Edmonds, a Director of Stemcor, the international steel company, was on holiday that week with his three sons, and claimed to have taken a photograph of his three sons playing in the Ocean Club playground, on Thursday 3rd May, showing Madeleine McCann in the background. He further claimed publicly that he had sent this photograph to the PJ. However, no such photograph appears in the PJ files, not has it been published elsewhere. There is every reason to doubt whether – even if he has supplied such a photograph – that it could prove that Madeleine was alive that day (38).

EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 4. The fabricated statement of Nuno Lourenco, who tried to identify Wojchiech Krokowski as a potential child-kidnapper who had tried to abduct his daughter on Sagres beach.

Nuno Lourenco claimed he was living in Germany but had been over to Sagres for a short holiday to see his mother, who still lives in the area. (8)

Early on Saturday 5th May, he contacted the PJ to say that a man had been photographing children (including his own) on Sagres beach during the afternoon of Sunday 29th April (although Goncalo Amaral gives a different date for this in his book). (8) (18)

Nuno Lourenco provided a photograph in support of his claims. He said that he had managed to take a photograph of the man on his mobile ’phone before he drove away. He also gave the police the last four digits of the car registration number of the vehicle. (8)

With this information, the Portuguese police were able to establish that the owner of the car was a car rental agency based in Burgau, and that the car had been rented for the week by a Mr Wojchiech Krokowski. Krokowski and his wife had been holidaying at an apartment in the Sol e Mar building in Burgau. The police later established further details about Krokowski and his wife from the owner or manager of the Burgau Beach Bar (believed to be Mr Ralph Eveleigh or his manager), a CCTV in a shop in Lisbon, and the Polish Police. (8) (18)

It is clear from what we said in our introduction that Gonçalo Amaral and his PJ team believed that Nuno Lourenco had identified the same man as seen by Jane Tanner. (18)

If we now compare the descriptions by Jane Tanner (of the man she said she saw) and by Nuno Lourenco (of the man we now know to have been Wojchiech Krokowski), the similarities are astonishing, as we now set out in this table:

Jane Tanner description of the man Lourenco description of Krokowski

aged between 35 and 40 aged 40
dark brown hair, falling over his collar brown hair down to his collar
wearing cream or beige trousers wearing cream-coloured trousers
wearing black shoes in the classic style shoes of a classic style
warmly dressed, the reason she did not look like a tourist
thought he was not a tourist

We make these observations on Nuno Lourenco’s statement (3):
The account he gives of the attempted kidnap lacks credibility in several respects:
why would a holidaymaker, with his car apparently parked some way away outside the village, attempt (in broad daylight) to kidnap a child?
why are there no other witnesses to this incident?
his account of how he tried to take a photo of Krokowski, but failed because his finger was blocking the viewfinder, also lacks credibility
his account of what actually happened inside and outside the café also does not have the ‘ring of truth’ about it
he did not report what (if true) must have been a frightening incident to the police until six days later
he laid great emphasis on how the date and time stamp on his mobile ’phone ‘proved’ that the photograph of Krokowski’s car was taken around 6pm on Sunday 29th April. This reminds us of another photograph, the ‘Last Photo’, was said to have been taken on Thursday 3 May, according to the date stamp, yet evidence suggests that it was taken four days earlier. We suggest that it is likely in all the circumstances that Lourenco took this photograph later in the week, but date-stamped it to fool the PJ team into thinking it was taken on the Sunday
he did not ’phone the police until six days later, and waited until after Jane Tanner had given her statement to the police
moreover, he waited until around the time that the plane taking Krokowski and his wife back to Poland was taking off from faro Airport. This seems to us like more than a coincidence (9) (10).

Taking all these matters into account, and having regard also to the astonishing coincidences between the descriptions given by Jane Tanner (of the man) and Nuno Lourenco (of Wojchiech Krokowski), we arrive at these very disturbing conclusions:
Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco were describing the same man – Wojchiech Krokowski
The description must therefore have been based on Wojchiech Krokowski and what he was wearing that week
Either Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco must have colluded in order to give police identical descriptions, OR at least one third party must have planned this collusion, and given them instructions on what to say to the police (3).

This means that Jane Tanner, Nuno Lourenco, and any or all people who colluded in deceiving the police in this way have committed the offence (in English law) of perverting the course of justice. In English law this offence attracts the maximum penalty of 14 years.

[ NOTE: We add here the strange matter of the evidence of three members of the Smith family, who claimed to have seen a man carrying a girl dressed only in pyjamas at about 10.00pm on Thursday 3 May. What is astonishing is that when they travelled to Portugal to give their statements on 26 May, they also gave an almost identical description of the man they claimed they saw to those given by Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco.

The Smiths also described a man ‘about 35-40’, ‘wearing cloth clothes’, ‘wearing classic shoes’, and who ‘didn’t look like a tourist’. The girl he was carrying was also dressed only in white/pink pyjamas.

If we are correct in asserting that Madeleine was probably dead on Sunday, then what possible explanation can there be for him reporting seeing someone, at about 10.00pm on Thursday 3rd May, identical to the descriptions of a man given by Jane Tanner and Nuno Lourenco?

It raises a realistic possibility that this was also a fabrication, and that Martin Smith and his family were also using the same description of Wojchiech Krokowski.

We may add that on 20th September 2007, nine days after seeing TV footage of Gerry McCann carrying his son Sean down the steps of an aeroplane, Martin Smith claimed (with 60% to 80% certainty] that the man he said he had seen on 3rd May was Gerry McCann. Yet despite that, he admits to having been contacted by Mr Brian Kennedy, head of the McCanns’ private investigation, in December 2007, and since then has clearly been working with the McCanns, making public statements sympathising with the McCanns and urging the public to ‘look for the abductor’ ]. (3)

EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 5. The unreliable evidence of the children’s nanny, Catriona Baker, Dr Gerry McCann and Dr Kate McCann about an alleged ‘high tea’ at the Ocean Club Tapas restaurant, at about 5pm to 6pm on Thursday 3 May.

The crucial evidence that Madeleine was still alive at 5.30pm on Thursday 3rd May came from one of the nannies, Catriona Baker (39) (40) (41). She was also the crèche nanny for Madeleine’s daytime group, the ‘Lobsters’. Both Tavares de Almeida and Gonçalo Amaral in his book were certain that she was telling the truth, and that, because she was thought to be an ‘independent’ witness, they could rely on her word (18).

Detailed investigation, however, has uncovered a mass of contradictions as between the four main witnesses who gave evidence about this alleged ‘high tea’ on the Thursday afternoon: Dr Gerry McCann, Kate McCann, and crèche nannies Catriona Baker and Charlotte Pennington (12). These contradictions have been analysed by many Madeleine researchers. All have come to the conclusion that the contradictions are so many and so serious that it is highly doubtful that this ‘high tea’ happened at all. It is simply not possible to accept Catriona Baker as a witness of truth.

Furthermore, research has uncovered the fact that Catriona Baker probably knew the McCanns before this holiday (4).

Records on the social media group Facebook show that Catriona Baker was, in 2006 and possible before then, a Facebook friend of Chloe Corner. Chloe Corner is the daughter of Madeleine’s godfather, Jon Corner. Jon Corner was highly involved in events after Madeleine was reported missing. Within hours, he was seemingly able to send unlimited photos of Madeleine to the media, from his home in Liverpool. In addition, Jon Corner said he had been to Praia da Luz several times previously, suggesting a connection with the village. Jon Corner also lived with the McCanns for around a week in August 2007, during which time he took them to Huelva to distribute leaflets about Madeleine. He made a film about Madeleine which was later used by Panorama for their programme about Madeleine shown on 19 November 2017 (4).

In November 2007, six months after Madeleine was reported missing, Catriona Baker visited the McCanns in Rothley, staying with them for a number of days. There are also indications from Kate McCann’s account of Catriona Baker in her book, ‘madeleine’, that she may have known her already, although she does not admit to this (4).

These connections of Catriona Baker to Jon Corner and the McCanns were not known to the PJ team nor to Gonçalo Amaral. If they had been, they would certainly not have been so ready to regard her as an ‘independent’ witness.

EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 6. The lack of any credible, independent evidence by anybody that Madeleine McCann was seen alive after Sunday 29th April.

We have said that Madeleine was seen alive on Sunday 29th April at lunch-time. We have given evidence that we cannot rely on the claims by Catriona Baker and the McCanns that Madeleine was alive at an alleged ‘high tea’ on Thursday afternoon. (Charlotte Pennington later gave a statement about this alleged ‘high tea’ but that also contradicted the other three statements).

All other claims by witnesses who claim to have seen Madeleine after Sunday have been examined in detail by a British ex-pat now living in Canada, Lizzy Taylor (13). She concluded that apart from the evidence given by the McCanns and their Tapas 7 friends - which of course is not independent – all other statements claiming to have seen her were open to serious doubt. Many were extremely vague, with no checkable details given. Others were plainly wrong, for example, witnesses claiming to have seen Madeleine eating breakfast with the McCanns in the Millennium when the McCanns in their statements have consistently said they ate breakfast in their apartment every day from Monday onwards.

The absence of any other reliable witness to seeing Madeleine from Monday onwards is disturbing, and strongly tends to confirm that Madeleine was not alive after Sunday.

EVIDENCE OF DEATH ON SUNDAY OR MONDAY – 7. The mystery of the strange ‘Make-Up Photo’ of Madeleine, which appears to have been taken on Sunday 29th April.

The ‘Make-Up Photo’ was first published in a short, 2-minute video made by Madeleine’s godfather, Jon Corner. It shows Madeleine with a great deal of make-up, namely:
a necklace
a hair bead
eye shadow, and
eye liner.

It must also be said that Madeleine has very dilated (large) pupils in the photo, and there is no sign whatsoever of any happiness or joy. Rather, she looks deeply sad. Many observers have understandably called it a ‘Lolita’ photograph (42).

When this photo was published, it attracted much negative comment, including in one British broadsheet newspaper, the Independent. A prominent criminologist, Mark Williams-Thomas, also criticized the McCanns for releasing this photograph (although it is by no means certain that the McCanns gave permission for this photograph to be published) (42).

The McCanns claimed that the Make-Up Photo showed Madeleine ‘playing with Mummy’s make-up box’ and told the media that the picture was taken ‘a few weeks before’ their Praia da Luz holiday (42).

Many Madeleine researchers who have studied this photograph carefully have made these observations about it (14) (15):
Madeleine could not have applied the eyeliner herself. She could not have applied either the lipstick or the blue eye-shadow neatly. She certainly could not have put on her necklace herself, nor her hair bead. An adult must have done all this, but we have not been told who did it. Therefore the McCanns have not been truthful about the circumstances in which this photograph was taken. That means we are entitled to ask serious questions about when, where and why it was taken.
In the photo, we see Madeleine’s pupils dilated (enlarged)
Madeleine displays no signs of fun, joy or happiness in this photo, as you would expect if she was having fun playing with Mummy’s make-up box. On the contrary, there seems to be a look of sadness, or even fear or dread in her eyes.
The photo is taken against a stucco background, either cream, yellow or ochre in colour. This is most unlike houses built in England. However, it strongly resembles the outdoor cladding of many buildings along the Algarve coast in Portugal.
Madeleine’s appearance in the Make Up Photo is strikingly similar to how she looks in the ‘Last Photo’, which we assert was taken on the Sunday. In both photos:
Madeleine’s hair length, style and colour is identical
in both, she is wearing a hair bead (although in different positions), and
in both, she can be seen wearing a pink-coloured smock, top or dress.

Especially given what we have said in point (5) above, we are entitled to ask whether this photo could have been taken on the McCanns’ holiday in Praia da Luz, possibly even on the very same day as the Last Photo – Sunday, 29th April.

Clear photographic evidence that the very same pyjamas Madeleine had with her on holiday in Praia da Luz were later held up by the McCanns at two press conferences, one in London on 5th June 2007, the other in Amsterdam, Holland, on 7th June 2007.

Here we rely, first, on evidence that can be viewed on the film: ‘Madeleine: Why the Cover-Up?’ by Richard D Hall, link here: (4)

Second, we rely on the longer, written analysis by Dr Martin Roberts in an article titled ‘A Nightwear Job’, which can be viewed here: (16)

In summary, the film by Hall and the article by Dr Roberts reveal the following:
Madeleine’s pyjamas were photographed by the McCanns before they raised the alarm about Madeleine being missing at about 10.00pm on 3 May
Very clear photographic evidence (and other accompanying evidence) proves that the identical pair of pyjamas were personally displayed by the McCanns at two press conferences, one in London on 5th June 2007, the other in Amsterdam, Holland, on 7th June 2007.

It follows from these two facts that the entire claim by the McCanns that Madeleine was abducted - in her pyjamas, between 9.15pm and 10.00pm - is false. Madeleine must therefore have disappeared under entirely different circumstances. As Dr Roberts out it in his article: “If Madeleine’s pyjamas were not abducted, then neither was Madeleine”.


A number of objections have been raised to our hypothesis. We list them here and give brief answers:

1 ‘It would be impossible for so many people to lie about the death of a missing girl and take part in a cover-up’
2 ‘No-one would dare to stage a hoax abduction after their child had been dead 3-4 days’
3 ‘The McCanns and their friends could not have all agreed to cover up a child’s death’
3 ‘It is impossible to believe that Catriona Baker, Madeleine’s crèche nanny, could help to forge the crèche records and lie about Madeleine not being in the crèche from Monday onwards’
4 ‘Mrs Fenn heard Madeleine crying for her Daddy between 10.30pm and 11.45pm on Tuesday 1 May’.

In reply, we make the following points.

So far as Mrs Fenn’s evidence is concerned, there are several major problems about it:
she did not make statements about having heard Madeleine crying until 20th August, over 3½ months after Tuesday 1st May (4) (43)
neither did she make statements about an alleged break-in at her flat until 20th August (4) (44)
a review of all the statements she made about the alleged burglary reveals major contradictions e.g. about when the burglary was supposed to have happened, what actually happened inside her flat, how the intruder escaped, and who else was there at the time (44)
the evidence she gave was leaked in advance and was published in the British press on 18 & 19 August i.e. before she gave her statement, suggesting that she colluded with others in giving her evidence (4) (43) (44)
she claims to have heard Madeleine crying ever more loudly for 75 minutes – but no-one else in the apartment bloc heard this
she contrived her statement to say that the crying was that of a child ‘more than two years old’ – but it is not possible to make such a clear distinction between the crying of a three-year-old and a two-year old
she did not seek any help in alerting anyone else to the crying she said she heard, except an alleged telephone call to a Mrs Edna Glyn, which as far as we know from the PJ files the Portuguese police were unable to verify, and
she herself told the media to ignore all that had been said in the newspapers about her evidence.
There are further details about the multiple problems with her evidence at these references: (43) (44)

In response to the other points above, we simply do not know how Madeleine died, especially now that it seems certain that she died on the Sunday or possibly Monday. It is possible, in fact we say probable, that she may have died under circumstances where the McCanns and their friends felt there was serious risk for them if Madeleine’s body was to be produced for an autopsy. At this point we mention the sexually suggestive remarks made by Dr David Payne about Madeleine, as reported on 19th May 2007 by Dr Arul and Dr Katarina Gaspar. We also think it is relevant to point out that the Gaspars’ two statements were not forwarded to the PJ until three weeks after Gonçalo Amaral had been removed from the case.

It has been suggested that Madeleine’s death could not have been covered up because far too many people must have been involved. In reply, we suggest that only a handful of people would be needed to keep Madeleine’s death a secret. By Sunday night, Madeleine would not be known by many people except the McCanns, their ‘Tapas 7’ friends and Catriona Baker, Madeleine’s crèche nanny (who, as we have evidenced, seems to have been a friend of the McCann family already). Possibly the Ocean Club Manager and someone from Mark Warner may have been informed and a collective decision made to keep Madeleine’s death a secret and plan a hoax abduction (45) (46) (47).

If Madeleine’s death was the result of any criminality, that would be a powerful reason for those involved to cover up what had happened. A cover-up and hoax abduction could then have been carried out in total secrecy.

The facts point to death on Sunday, or Monday at the latest.

This, we suggest, opens up a vital new line of enquiry. This, we suggest, must be the starting-point for a fresh Portuguese police investigation.

We conclude by suggesting what we think must be obvious by now to the Portuguese authorities: namely that the Metropolitan Police investigation into Madeleine’s death, Operation Grange, has clearly never been a genuine attempt by the British police to get to the truth of what really happened to Madeleine.

We add many references below and would be willing to assist the Portuguese judicial and police authorities in any further way that we can.

Yours sincerely

The Madeleine McCann Research Group


What Really Happened to Madeleine McCann, by ‘PeterMac’ (retired British Police Superintendent) and at

“The True Story of Madeleine McCann”, 1st Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall

“The Phantoms: Four fake abductors”, 2nd Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall, 2nd Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall (examines the fake abduction accounts of Jane Tanner, Nino Lourenco, Martin Smith and the Metropolitan Police)

“When Madeleine Died?”, 3rd Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall
 (comprehensive evidence that Madeleine died on Sunday 29 April)

“Madeleine – Why the Cover-Up?” 4th Madeleine documentary film by Richard D Hall  (Part 1 of 6 parts)

Intercalary (interim) report of Chief Inspector Tavares de Almeida, 10 September 2007, Portuguese Policia Judiciara files,

The SIX photos that provide the biggest clue to when Madeleine died, CMOMM forum,


“Was Wojcek Krokowski, Sagres man with a camera, the template for both Tannerman and Smithman?”, CMOMM forum,

“Krokowski 2: Nuno Lourenco’s account of how Wojchiech Krokowski nearly kidnapped his child”, CMOMM forum,

“Textusa article 30 October 2015 on ‘Sagresman’ (Wojchiech Krokowski)…”, CMOMM forum,

“Catriona Baker and the Creche”, Hideho/Lizzy Taylor,

“Was Madeleine Seen After Sunday? – Is there any credible evidence that she was? (28 September 2015), Hideho/Lizzy Taylor,

“The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo: Was it taken on the same day as the ‘Last Photo?”, CMOMM forum,

“Richard Hall’s Appeal for new Information re Madeleine’s Make-Up Photo”, CMOMM forum,

“A Nightwear Job”, by Dr Martin Roberts, posted on the CMOMM forum,

“Out, Damn’d Spot”, by Dr Martin Roberts, posted on the CMOMM forum (Madeleine’s pyjamas)

“A Verdade da Mentira” (English translation by AnnEsse: ‘The Truth of the Lie’), by Goncalo Amaral (2008) [NOTE: Some words of this translation have been amended by Paulo Reis who has translated this letter]


“YES or NO? Did Dr David Payne visit Dr Kate McCann on the evening Madeleine was reported missing? - 20

CONTRADICTIONS which suggest that this visit never took place”

“The ‘Niggle’ and the Strange Tale of Robert Murat: Was it a Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice? ”, Paulo Reis,

“Is this the man who abducted Madeleine? Two witnesses give similar descriptions”, Guardian, 20 January 2008,

“Hunt for new Madeleine McCann Suspect, Daily Telegraph, 20 January 2008,

“New Sketch Of 'Creepy Madeleine Suspect”, by Joana Morais,

“A Joint Investigation”, Duarte Levy,

“BBC Crimewatch McCann Special, 14 October, 2013”

“Why did Madeleine McCann Detectives ask so few Questions, after a Major Breakthrough?”, Daily Mail, August 2009

“The Mystery of Robert Murat: From Arguido to Applause”, Sections F et seq

“Clarence Mitchell Spinning for the McCanns – and for Jane Tanner”, by Joana Morais,

“Clarence Mitchell Interview for Channel 4” (Mitchell evades questions about why Jane Tanner identified Robert Murat as the abductor)

“Another Look at the Last Photo”, CMOMM forum,

“CHAPER 14: The Last Photo/The Pool Photo by ‘PeterMac''

“Alex Woolfall Knows: The Last Photo and other photos of Madeleine in Praia da Luz”  

“CHAPER 22: The Tennis Balls by ‘PeterMac’” 

“When was the Tennis Balls Photo taken?”, CMOMM forum,

“Recap on the Tennis Balls Photo”,

“Philip Edmond, Deputy Chairman of Stemcor and Nephew of Lady Margaret Hodge”, CMOMM forum,

“STATEMENT OF CATRIONA BAKER (Madeleine’s trip to the beach)”



“60 Reasons why the McCanns should never have published THAT photo: The Make-Up ‘Lolita’ Photo”.

“10 Reasons which suggest that Pamela Fenn did not hear any child crying on Tuesday 1 May 2007*, CMOMM forum,

“Was there an attempted burglary of Mrs Pameal Fenn’s flat in the week before Madeleine was reported missing?”

“Planning the abduction hoax: Was it done over four days or four hours?”, by MMRG, on the CMOMM forum,

“What really happened to Madeleine McCann: Was she killed on Sunday 29thh April?”, CMOMM forum,

“Madeleine McCann could not have died from an accident, nor from anything else, after 5.30pm on Thursday 3 May 2007”

Paulo Reis   

Saturday 17 March 2018

Attorney General receives “new theory” in disappearance of Madeleine McCann

A team of independent investigators working over the last decade has come up with what it believes may have happened to Madeleine McCann.

It is independent of the official story. It doesn’t work to the accepted timeline and it doesn’t involve gypsies, blundering burglars, or Eastern European child smugglers.

Says a member of the investigating group, the theory has been run past professionals from all walks of life, time and again.

The team are convinced that this now needs to be seriously considered by the investigative authorities.

They have communicated their findings to British prime minister Theresa May, and the Metropolitan Police Commissioner Cressida Dick, but the six-page letter laying out what they believe to be “credible evidence” appears to have changed nothing (although it was purportedly forwarded to the Grange ‘investigation team’).

A new letter, translated into Portuguese - containing all the research, and the “detailed file of evidence” on which it has relied - has now been sent to the Portuguese Attorney General as well as newspaper and website journalists in this country.

Said our source: “It is a question of hoping one of them will have the courage to undertake what no-one seems willing to conduct in the UK: a serious investigation into what really happened to Madeleine Beth McCann”.

This development comes just as the British Home Office is considering yet another request for funding of the Met’s long-running Operation Grange investigation.

Grange was opened in 2011 and has so far spent over £11 million investigating Madeleine’s disappearance against a backdrop of criticism, particularly over social media.

As the Madeleine McCann Research Group waits to hear what develops from the 20-page letter - sent from the UK on March 6 and logged as received by the Attorney General’s office on March 12 - a leading member of the group said: “it is important that people follow this logically, and without preconceptions - however shocking the conclusion may seem”.

Thursday 8 February 2018



[ Note: These purported messages, from 50 people who helped the McCanns in one way or another are interpretations, based on information in the public domain. Some of them include an element of irony and satire.  Where quotations are in inverted commas, these are actual quotes from the people concerned. Otherwise, their statements are not meant to be taken literally, though we believe they reflect realities – MMRG, December 2017 ]

Part 3 of 10
11  DETECTIVE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT BOB SMALL, formerly with Leicestershire Police


’Evening All I am DCS Bob Small, I am a little camera shy, that’s why there is not one single photograph of me on the internet.

As Jane Tanner says, I spoke to her on the afternoon of Sunday 13 May, just before she identified Robert Murat as the man she said she’d seen 10 days earlier carrying a child near the McCanns’ apartment. With me were two gentlemen from government-backed private security firm, Control Risks Group, Kenneth Farrow and Michael Keenan.

We were just three people out of a vast number of people who rushed out to Praia da Luz, ostensibly to help find a missing girl. Here’s list of them:

THE PEOPLE WHO RUSHED OUT TO PRAIA DA LUZ AFTER 3 MAY 2007 AND BY FRIDAY 11 MAY 2007, with dates of arrival (or, in the cases of Resonate and Robert Murat, before then).  

Government and Embassy Officials

Robert Henderson – British Consul for the Algarve – immediate (persuaded Portuguese Police to allow the McCanns to wash clothes before seizing them)

John Buck – British Ambassador to Portugal (Lisbon), arrived immediately

Angela Morado – British Proconsul, arrived immediately

Liz Dow, British Consul from the Embassy in Lisbon, arrived immediately

Andy Bowes, British Embassy Press Officer, arrived immediately

Sheree Dodd, Foreign and Commonwealth Office

Other staff from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office

British Police Officers

Glen Power, British Police Liaison Officer for Portugal, arrived 5 May

An ‘Analyst’ (unnamed) from the National Policing Improvements Agency, arrived 4 May

Detective Chief Superintendent Bob Small, Leicestershire Police (4 May)

Two other police ‘family liaison’ officers from Leicestershire Police (4 May)

Government security and secret service personnel

Staff from MI5 (unnamed)

Staff from Child Exploitation and Online Protection Service (unnamed – Kate McCann in her book describes them As ‘Forensic Psychologists’), arrived 4 May

More staff from CEOP, the ‘Director of the Forensic Psychology Unit’ AND a CEOP ‘social worker’ (arrived 6 May)

Staff from Special Branch (unnamed)

‘Criminal profilers’ (unnamed - attached to unnamed government security departments)

Government-funded private security firms

Kenneth Farrow from Control Risks Group

Michael Keenan from Control Risks Group

Staff from government-supported private crisis psychology group

Alan Pike, Head of Yorkshire-based Centre for Crisis Psychology (CCP) (arrived 4 May)

Martin Alderton, Colleague of Alan Pike from CCP (arrived 5 May)

Public Relations Consultants

Michael Frolich, Head of Resonate, subsidiary of international PR company Bell Pottinger (already there by Monday 30 April)

Tricia Moon, Deputy Director of Resonate, (already there by Monday 30 April)

Alex Woolfall, Head of Risk for international PR company Bell Pottinger, arrived 4 May (helped to edit Gerry McCann’s photos before putting them on a disc for the PJ)


Staff from the recently-formed International Family Law Group (IFLG):

Michael Nicholls, barrister, arrived 11 May

Accompanied by a ‘paralegal’ from Leicestershire, arrived 11 May

There are references to other government lawyers having arrived

Top staff from Mark Warner (company that organised the holiday)

David Hopkins, Managing Director of Mark Warner

One of his senior colleagues


Robert Murat became the initial main interpreter for the Portuguese Police on 4 May. He had already flown out from England on 1 May. He was recommended by British Consul Robert Henderson

Religious Organisations

Rev. Haynes and Susan Hubbard mysteriously arrived in Praia da Luz from Canada on Sunday 6 May, to take up an appointment as the Anglican Minister in Praia da Luz. The Hubbards rapidly became very close friends of the McCanns


‘Hugh’ – Kate in her book says he would only identify himself as ‘Hugh’, he was brought in by Control Risks Group and said he was ‘a former intelligence officer, now a kidnap negotiator and counsellor’. He attended meeting with the lawyers from IFLG


Clarence Mitchell, Head of the government’s Media Monitoring Unit: According to the reply to a Freedom of Information request, he was appointed on Sunday 6 May to head up the government’s PR support for the McCanns, but he did not travel to Portugal until 22 May 2007

The government set up a very high-powered liaison committee on Tuesday 8 May under the Chairmanship of Matt Baggott, Leicestershire Police Chief Constable. It consisted of representatives from a wide variety of government departments and agencies. The government has refused to answer FOI Act questions about who those agencies were.

Government Ministers Gordon Brown (Chancellor of the Exchequer) and Margaret Beckett (Foreign Secretary) spoke to Gerry McCann in the first week. Tony Blair, Prime Minister, did so later.

Literally hundreds of international journalists were also there in that first week.


Impressive, eh? So, you see, I was just part of a big team trying to help the McCanns. My part included influencing Jane Tanner to identify Robert Murat as a suspect, thus taking the heat off the McCanns. Played me cards well, eh? They didn’t promote me to the rank of DCS for nothing, y’know.    

12  ANTONIO JIMINEZ RASO, Metodo 3 detective


Hola! I’m a Spaniard, or should I say a Catalan, from Barcelona. I once had a high position in the Drugs and Trafficking Division of the Regional Catalan Police. But I fell from grace when I got involved (along with my twin brother) in a 27-strong drugs gang. The extra money was too tempting. I got involved in helping the gang who stole 25 kilos of cocaine from a boat in Barcelona harbour, as a result of which I had to leave my job in the police.

In 2007 I was approached by the disreputable police agency, Metodo 3, to do certain jobs of work for the McCanns. By now, I needed the extra money, so I agreed to do whatever they wanted. They sent me off to Morocco, where my Spanish would be very helpful in trying to persuade people to say they had seen Madeleine, in exchange for a few pounds - or I should say ‘dirhams’ - which is the Moroccan currency these days.

In fact my main role with the McCann Team was to create plausible sightings of her. No way were we actually looking for Madeleine. I even attended a meeting in Portugal with Brian Kennedy and Metodo 3 boss Francisco Marco, when we met the Portuguese police. That was on 13 November 2007. We gave them three bogus sightings, which served to waste more police time following them up.

It was a bit of a problem when I was arrested on 18 February 2008 and remanded in custody for my alleged involvement in the drugs theft from the Barcelona-based ship. The media reported that I was one of the Madeleine McCann investigators employed by Metodo 3. Clarence Mitchell threw the police off the scent straightaway, however, by the simple expedient of denying it! As usual, he got away with his lie.  

I was very relieved that the judge in the Martorell Court, Barcelona, did not convict me of assisting the 27-strong gang nor find that I’d been corrupt. The judge said that this gang was ‘exceptionally violent’. I was very relieved that he let me off, though he did say that I had ‘got far too close’ to these violent career criminals. Phew!    

13    JULIAN PERIBANEZ, another Metodo 3 detective

Hola! I was another Spaniard employed by Metodo 3 boss Francisco Marco. I helped him and Antonia Giminez Raso to put false sightings of Madeleine into the media. But eventually I fell out with Marco and wrote a book about my time with Metodo 3. It was called ‘The Smokescreen’ - La Cortina da Huma. I explained how the whole outfit was ridden with corruption and criminality. I wrote one whole chapter about what Metodo 3 did for the McCanns, and you can read a translation of it on Jill Havern’s excellent forum, ‘The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann’, here:

In my book, I exposed how Metodo 3 produced fake invoices to claim money from the McCanns’ ‘Find Madeleine Fund’. I also exposed how Marco lied about how many people were working for him on the Madeleine McCann case. I wrote: “Francisco Marco’s agency [said it] turned over about a thousand cases each year…yet during the six years I spent with the company I only dealt with two such cases. Where Madeleine’s case was concerned, Francisco Marco brazenly lied to journalists, claiming he had about 40 people working on the Madeleine McCann case in Barcelona and Morocco”.

Marco was once asked how the Madeleine McCann case would end. He replied: “I would give Madeleine her dolls, calm her down, remove her from the place where she was, ring her parents and put her on the phone”.

I did my bit for the McCanns. I interviewed witnesses, even attended a meeting in Brian Kennedy’s ‘Maddie office’ in Knutsford, where I met Freemason Edward Smethurst, and travelled to Portugal with Brian Kennedy and his son Patrick, where, by the way, I was filmed walking with Kennedy. I held up some maps in front of my face so that I couldn’t be recognised. I did my bit for the McCanns and they paid me for my trouble.     

14  DAVE EDGAR, retired Detective Inspector

Hi. I live in Cheshire, close to Brian Kennedy. I used to work in the police service in Northern Ireland, but left and started again as a Detective Constable in Cheshire. In late 2008, Brian Kennedy asked me to work for him. He gave me offices to work in, in a house he had bought in Knutsford, Cheshire, also near where he lives. Brian told me that I would be portrayed in the media as the successful boss of a well-established private detective agency, Alpha Investigations Group. This was a complete lie, but I wanted the money so I agreed to go along with it.

My first job was to get ready for a documentary being made by Mentorn Media and Channel 4 on the Madeleine McCann case, which was shown in May 2009, two years after Madeleine’s reported disappearance. I was filmed in Brian Kennedy’s office. It looked good on camera. There I was, surrounded by white boards with lots of writing and diagrams on them, bulky-looking files, ’phones and laptops. It really did look like a genuine investigation. I was quite a good actor, you see. In the documentary, I appeared briefly to try and explain away all the massive contradictions between the various different accounts of events given by the McCanns, their friends and others. I waved all this away in a short interview where I said, pretending to be an expert on these things: “Oh well, you always get a few inconsistencies when witnesses try to describe a certain event from memory”.

Later that year, I had to ‘front’ another bogus story about what happened to Madeleine. This was a story which suggested that a woman (who we said ‘looked like Victoria Beckham) was waiting on the Barcelona dockside for Madeleine to arrive by yacht from Portugal. She supposedly went up to men on the docks asking them: ‘Have you got my new daughter?’ This ‘information’ was given to us by a British businessman who had waited two years to come up with this story. Oh, well, that’s what we said, anyway. About a month later, an article in the Mail on Sunday strongly criticised me and my team for not having done ‘basic detective work’ in Barcelona before going public with our story. But that didn’t matter. We had fooled both the media and the public with yet one more bogus ‘sighting’ of a suspect. During the press conference on this mystery woman, I said that Jane Tanner might have seen a woman carrying Madeleine away, not a man. This made both me and Jane Tanner look like idiots, or worse. But, no matter, I got well paid for my work.

I did one more favour for the McCanns. Just after the ‘Victoria Beckham-lookalike’ story, sensational details emerged in the U.S. of an 11-year-old girl, Jaycee Lee Dugard, who had been abducted in 1991. A full eighteen years later, she was discovered to have been living with a Mr and Mrs Garrido, aged 29 and with two children by Mr Garrido.    This was great news for the McCanns. Garrido had kept Jaycee Lee in an underground complex at his home for 18 years. The McCanns said that this case gave them ‘renewed hope’ that Madeleine might one day be found alive. I was set to work on developing a new ‘theory’ that Madeleine was being ‘held in a hellish prison lair’ in the ‘lawless hills’ just a few miles from Praia da Luz. Of course, it was utter nonsense, but the press recycled our new theory without critical comment. We didn’t actually believe our nonsense, so we never sent anyone out there to investigate our claim, and the Portuguese police didn’t buy it, either. But the story kept ‘missing Madeleine McCann’ in the headlines, and encouraged the general public to think there was still a realistic chance that madeleine could be alive. And that was all that mattered. 

15  ARTHUR COWLEY, retired Detective Sergeant


Hi, I was employed by Brian Kennedy soon after Dave Edgar was appointed. And I appeared with him in the Channel 4 documentary in May 2009. After 30 years in the police force, I had only been promoted once: from Detective Constable (the lowest rank)   to Detective Sergeant. Brian Kennedy wanted the media and the public to think that I was the owner of a business called ‘Alpha Investigations Group’. So he got one of his business friends to set up a domain name: ‘ALPHAIG’ and also helped me create a company with the same name. But it was all a hoax. The business address was my cottage house high up on Halkyn Mountain, over 1,000 feet up in the Welsh hills, where I keep a horse and a few pigeons. There was no office for clients up there. ALPHAIG never traded. It never advertised its services. It never did any business. It produced just one year of accounts which also showed no activity. It was a completely bogus company, but I went along with it as Mr Brian Kennedy paid me quite well for my services. After I finished working for the McCanns, I told the papers: “I will take my secrets about the McCanns to the grave”. So I’ve nothing more to say. Sorry.