Sunday, November 08, 2015

Kate McCann Never Less Than Dignified

Kate McCann Never Less Than Dignified

Famous faces pick their person of the year

Liz Hunt, Sunday Telegraph columnist
29 Dec 2007

Kate McCann. Madeleine’s mother suffers daily the torture of knowing she should have been there for her child and has endured the agony of being implicated in her death. Yet she has never been less than dignified, and her focus on finding her daughter has not wavered. link

Takes your breath away doesn't it?

This somewhat less than dignified begging bowl made its appearance in Pria da Luz shortly after the McCanns disappeared their daughter, Madeleine. 

And disappeared her they did, make no mistake, Madeleine McCann was not abducted. And should anybody like to argue the fact in a court of law, fine by me, bring it on. They can have their day, and I'll have mine.

Let me give you a brief analogy a shorter, hypothetical version of what you will find at the link above, the essence of the thing so to speak.

Scene, any courtroom in the land.

Gerry McCann: I apologise for being late your honour, my car had a punctured tyre.

Judge: Sergeant, please check Mr McCann's car.


Sergeant: No sign of a flat tyre m'Lud.

Judge: Mr McCann, that defence may be good enough for the Home Secretary and the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, but it is not acceptable to this court. (Take him down)

For flat tyre substitute jemmied shutters. (Take him down again)

Good enough for the Home Secretary; it must be mustn't it, why else would Theresa May be in the same room as Kate McCann, let alone rubbing shoulders with the woman.

Well not quite rubbing shoulders, I think a little body language, intentional or otherwise, has come to the fore in that picture. I don't know what that says to you dear reader, but I know what it says to me?

Tut tut Theresa, surely Kate McCann no longer reeks of her daughter's cadaver, it must be something else then? Proxemics is it?

Why Theresa May you might ask? Why not, it's her watch?

For every vile stunt pulled by the McCanns has been at the pleasure of previous and present Home Secretaries.

I will just say one thing more then I shall move on to the offending article.

When this shabby edifice finally comes tumbling down, as it must, of that much you must be well aware, you won't for shame Home Secretary cry, "Well I never! Who'dathunkit? Not for shame you won't.

To dignity then and the offending article.

Do I really need to add my comments to this deplorable drivel?

No, I'm sure I don't, I don't think I have the stomach for it. What I might do however is borrow a tweet I spied yesterday, yes, that will suffice and I'm sure you might agree.

A LIST!!! a fucking list. I weep.

Gerry and Kate McCann reveal the reasons why they miss Maddie
By Tracey Kandohla
6 Nov 2015

Kate and Gerry McCann include her smile, her dimples, her sense of humour, her “chat” and her excitement in the festive build-up
The parents of Madeleine McCann have compiled a heart-rending list of all the things they miss about their long-lost daughter in the run-up to Christmas.
The list accompanies a picture of the couple standing at their front door in Rothley, Leics.

The photo, taken for the charity Missing People’s Home for Christmas Exhibition, is among 12 pictures of -families who have missing loved ones.
The exhibition – at The Crypt in London’s St-Martin-in-the-Fields – highlights the plight of thousands of people across Britain who are living in limbo after the disappearance of a family member.

A charity spokesperson said: “These powerful images depict families standing by their front doors, symbolising the hopes and fears experienced by those desperately waiting for news.”

The picture of heart doctor Gerry and former GP Kate , both 47, is on public view until November 22. The couple, parents to 10-year-old twins Sean and Amelie, refuse to give up hope of finding their eldest child, who would now be 12.

Madeleine disappeared from a holiday apartment in Portugal’s Praia da Luz in May 2007.

Missing People’s Jo Youle said: “The exhibition will give the public the opportunity to stand with these families missing a loved one by sharing messages of support.”

Her smile
Her laughter
Her eyes
Her dimples
Her sense of humour
Her smartness
Her imitations of people and characters
Her voice, her ‘chat’
Her company
That knowing look
Her singing
Styling her hair
Chasing her round the garden
Sharing her excitement in the run-up to Christmas
Sharing anything
Spoiling her on her birthday
Shopping with her
Going to a cafe with her
Holding her, hugging her, kissing the top of her head
Lying next to her
Our complete family of five
We miss her
Who else but the Mirror?

Wednesday, November 04, 2015

Haute de la Garenne a Place of Evil

This article and video speak for themselves, anything I might have to say is superfluous.

Reblogged for posterity.

Exclusive Footage of "Eddie" Cadaver Dog at Haute de la Garenne
Voice For Children Blogspot
Saturday, 10 March 2012

Lenny Harper

Once more VFC is able to bring its readers/viewers another, what we are told is, a world exclusive.

With the assistance of Former Senior Investigating Officer of the Jersey Child Abuse Investigation, and Former Deputy Chief Police Officer Mr. Lenny Harper, we are able to bring you exclusive video footage of arguably the world's most renowned Cadaver Dog "Eddie" not only working at the crime scene of the Former Jersey Children's Home, Haute de la Garenne, but alerting to the scent of human death.

Not a great deal of these Cadaver dogs work has been reported in the State Media, other than to discredit them, so we asked Mr. Harper to document for us just exactly what is happening in the video below, what does a Cadaver dog do? How significant to the investigation the dog was? What, if anything did he (the dog) find?The results, it has to be said were astounding. Mr. Harper agreed to our request and once again we thank him for his commitment to the truth and justice.

For viewers information "JAR/6" is the fragment of child's skull.

00.00.0 Getting ready. I was reluctant to let the dog inside as I did not feel that it would do much good. In truth, I was a little sceptical – I had not felt a favourable impression from the handler (Martin Grimes) at our initial meeting and I was dubious, although my opinion of his qualities and integrity was to markedly change as events unfolded. I began to realise as I worked closely with him over a period of months that what I originally took as arrogance was simply supreme confidence in the ability of his dogs in the face of jealous, empire protecting rivals who were not as professionally capable. Throughout the investigation, we subjected Martin and his dogs to many ‘verifying’ tests, from burying swabs in sand (which he always found no matter how large an area), to minute blood stains. The dogs never failed. Many of these tests were carried out in front of Jersey politicians and media, including Channel Television and Diane Simon of the JEP. Frank Walker and Andrew Lewis were only two of the politicians who witnessed the ability of the dogs in hugely impressive displays. Funny how they all forgot this when they jumped on the bandwagon which sought to ruin Martin Grime’s reputation. One of the most spectacular exercises occurred when one of the Anthropologists brought a vial of sand back that she had removed from the tomb of a mummy in Egypt. We put this vial on a beach, below the sand, and let Eddie off to look for it. The dog amazingly sought it out in a few minutes and gave us the reaction you will see in this video. To get back to the start of the video and my initial doubts, after a few days outside I had at least gained a grudging respect for Martin’s hard work and dedication. I still was not keen to extend the search inside the house with the dog; however, I reluctantly conceded that we should look at all our possibilities so that we could walk away and say that we had given it a good shot. You can see me standing looking less than confident.

00.00.45 The first indication that the dog (Eddie) is finding something amiss. His behaviour has changed, and is remarked on by the handler. He is initially reacting further down from where we were to eventually find the initial fragment, (which ILM and others still incorrectly claim to be definitively identified as coconut) and in the flow of the drainage from the area where it was found. To clarify, Eddie is trained to trace the scent of dead human flesh. He will react where this scent is found, not necessarily where it was originally located. His strongest reaction will normally be where that scent is strongest, which will usually be where the dead flesh has lain longest, but he will sense it in areas where the scent has been carried, for instance, by drains.

00.01.08 Eddie is starting to react strongly now. Although still some yards from the finding of JAR/6, he smells something which has been carried down in the drainage from the original source. We were later to find that the drain ran down from where we found JAR/6 and where the bones were found by the builders, who suspected that they were also the bones of juveniles. One of them identified a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. These bones were found with children’s’ shoes which were to be later the source of interesting conflicts between the evidence of the pathologists and the staff at the Jersey Museum.

00.01.50 The doors and wall where Eddie is reacting so strongly now lead into the room where the top wall adjoins the stair area where JAR/6 (the infamous initial fragment) was found. Note the change in the dog’s behaviour, and the strong indication from his that there is something to be investigated here. It is important to note at this point, that the dog is only telling us that the scent of human death is here. He is not telling us that there has been a murder; he is not telling us that this is the spot where a body has been buried. He is only telling us that the scent of human death is at this spot. He is saying, “There is something here for you to investigate.” It is worthy of note, that this is also next to the location where builders found the bones which they thought were human juveniles, and where they were told that if they found bones to let “bygones be bygones.”

00.02.25 Eddie is now at the doors leading to the stairwell where both JAR/6 and the “builders’ bones” were found. Note that he is reacting strongly. To corroborate Eddie’s reaction we used the most up to date geological equipment supplied to us by the British Army and the Metropolitan Police (more services obtained through the use of contacts and a hospitality budget!) for which we paid nothing. These surveys confirmed inconsistencies in the sub floor levels.

00.02.39 Eddie is telling us that there is something we need to investigate on the other side of the door and he wants through to indicate this to us.

00.02.58 Eddie is now reacting very strongly and indicating to us that the scent of dead human flesh is in this location. This is where we were to find JAR/6, which the establishment continue to say was only coconut, but cannot explain how Eddie reacted as he did, nor indeed, how the lab at Oxford found Collagen.

Collagen is not found in coconut or wood, it is only present in mammals, which would seem to destroy the claims of the Jersey establishment, aided and abetted by the Jersey Evening Post and Channel Television, that JAR/6 is coconut or wood. Again, it is worthy of recall, that the builders who found the bones at this location thought they were human, and that one of them actually identified a bone as that of a child’s pelvic bone from the internet. Additionally, the police officer who was called to the scene was also dubious of the bones’ origins, as was the female pathologist who attended. She “did not like” the situation and referred the matter to her boss who said the bones where not consistent with being human. However, an Anthropologist later stated that he was incorrect and the measurements he quoted were entirely consistent with the bones being children’s’ pelvic bones as identified by one of the builders. The Anthropologist further stated that the Pathologist was not qualified to make the statement that he had.

00.04.06 Now Eddie has just left the wall adjoining the stair area where he reacted earlier. The drains in the building run from those stairs, under the adjoining wall, and down the room where we are now standing. As the dog is trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, he is now following the strong scent emanating from the other side of the wall and being carried in the drains under the floor of this room and down the room towards the corridor seen earlier in the video.

00.04.15 Note the dog’s return to the wall. This was almost the exact spot where JAR/6 was found. It is a few inches from where the builders found the bones which they thought were human and which they were told about, “Let bygones be bygones.” If this dog was a waste of money, then how did he lead us to this exact spot? How did he later, in the ‘live’ presence of Wendy Kinnard (the then Home Affairs Minister) and Graham Power (the then Chief Police Officer), lead us to the bones in the cellars which an Anthropologist in the United Kingdom said were “fleshed and fresh” when burnt and buried? It cannot be a co-incidence that this dog, trained to detect the scent of dead human flesh, reacted so strongly in an area where we were to find a fragment of substance initially identified by a professional, accomplished, Anthropologist, as a part of a child’s skull, and right beside the spot where builders found bones and children’s shoes which they thought were human bones. No amount of spin by Le Marquand and others can contradict this, and no amount of misinformation from Warcup and Gradwell can conceal this truth.

00.04.41 Eddie still on stairs, right above the location where JAR/6 was found. He comes down again to the exact spot.

00.05.20 Eddie still reacting strongly at the spot where JAR/6 was found.

This is the live video, filmed on a mobile phone as it happened. The film was made by the Homicide Search Advisor of the National Policing Improvement Agency, on his mobile phone. He was to later say that the way we had carried out the search of HDLG was a “shining example” and should be documented as an example of good practice. Where has this recommendation been lost in the mists? The reactions of the dog speak for themselves. Eddie is not telling us that murder was committed at HDLG. He is telling us that somewhere in the floor-space of the premises; the scent of human death has been present. He is telling us that there is something there for us to investigate. His findings have been corroborated by the finding of the bones and teeth, by the results of the surveys carried out by the most sophisticated of electronic geological equipment, and by the evidence of builders and former residents and victims of abuse in HDLG. This video totally contradicts the spin of Frank Walker, Andrew Lewis and Diane Simon of the Jersey Evening Post, all of whom were taken on a tour of the building and given a demonstration of the ability and capability of Eddie and his companion "Keela" the blood detection dog. All of them were aware of the true situation relating to the dog and the finds. All of them, for their own reasons, chose to ignore the truth and to peddle the myths of those seeking to discredit the victims of the horrific abuse within HDLG. They are now, in my opinion, exposed as craven cowards and not fit to lick those victims’ boots. As for Martin Grimes and the dogs that they have tried to discredit, they are now working full time for one of the best Law Enforcement Agencies in the world in the USA.(END)

We will publish some of the documented evidence concerning the finds of human remains in the comment section of this post.

voiceforchildren10 March 2012 at 17:22

As mentioned in the main posting.

Some documented evidence.

JAR/30: 3-4; 1940s to 1980s. Two fragments of burnt bone one is fragment of longbone? Tibia. Submitted to University of Sheffield with KSH/158. Origin confirmed as human. Submitted for dating awaiting results.

JAR/33: 3-4; 1940s to 1980’s.
Calcined fragment of bone. ?human.

JAR/53: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
5 fragments of calcined long bone ?human.

JAR/54: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
4 fragments of calcined bone ?human.

JAR/55: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
1 fragment of calcined bone ?human.

JAR/57:183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
2 fragments of bone of unknown origin.

JAR/56: 183. Cellar 3 Dark char rich deposit equivalent to 169.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
1 fragment of bone ?human.

JAR/67: 183. Zone 3 East Cellar 3.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Human Tooth: deciduous left maxillary first molar, age 9 yrs ± 3 yrs. Could have been shed naturally (Anthro exam).
Submitted to odontologist, see report.

JAR/69: 183. Zone 3 East Cellar 3.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragments x 3 of possible human cortical bone.

JAR/61: 183 Zone 4 East Cellar 3.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
23 Fragments of bone:
1 Burnt fragment which closely resembles a human juvenile mastoid process.
2. Burnt fragment of ?human mandible.
3. Fragments of burnt long bone x 3 measuring between 11.3 and 16.3 mm.
4. Fragments of unidentified burnt cortical and trabecular bone x 7.
5. Fragment of slightly burnt long bone measuring 33 mm. The cortex of the
bone resembles human but it is quite thick and the trabeculae can not be seen because it requires cleaning. It appears to have been cut at one end.
6. Fragments of unburnt unidentified long bone. x 3 The appearance and texture of the cortex of the fragments appears more animal than human but it is advised that further examination should be undertaken in order to confirm this.
7. Fragments of unidentified long bone x 7. 5 have been burnt and 2 haven’t. Species
uncertain although two of the burnt fragments could possibly be human

JAR/90: 183 Cellar 3 Zone 3 East.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragments of unidentified bone of unknown species. One which is calcined is possibly human bone.

Cellar 4 Context 169 (redeposited char material from fire elsewhere. Unsealed)

JAR/36: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of bone ?human.

JAR/37: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of burnt bone. ?human mastoid process

JAR/39: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of burnt bone ?human.

JAR/40: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Fragment of bone ?human.

GMK/18: 169. Cellar 4 E. Charred material at southern end of Zone 4. Equivalent to 127.
4 / 5: 1960s to present date.
Human tooth. Anthro exam – deciduous left maxillary lateral incisor. Age range 6 yrs ± 2yrs

More comments
Related: Madeleine McCann Was Not Abducted

Monday, November 02, 2015

What Have The McCanns To Be Thankful For?

Giving Thanks For Nothing, Courtesy Of The McCanns

Official Find Madeleine Campaign

We would like to thank all the staff from Operation Grange for the meticulous and painstaking work that they have carried out over the last four and a half years. The scale and difficulty of their task has never been in doubt. We are reassured that the investigation to find Madeleine has been significantly progressed and the MPS has a much clearer picture of the events in PDL leading up to Madeleine’s abduction in 2007.
Given that the review phase of the investigation is essentially completed, we fully understand the reasons why the team is being reduced. We would also like to thank the Home Office for continuing to support the investigation.
Whilst we do not know what happened to Madeleine, we remain hopeful that she may still be found given the ongoing lines of enquiry.

Gerry and Kate McCann


Who thanks Law Enforcement for failing to find their missing loved one, in this case, a child called Madeleine, and for failing to make any arrests in relation to the disappearance (alleged abduction by paedophile according to the parents and supporters) of said child, Madeleine?

Guilty persons thank law enforcement for not finding their missing loved one or failing to make arrests for same.
They are thankful law enforcement failed as they get to remain free.

Innocent persons are not thankful when their loved one isn't found.
They are not thankful when no arrests are made in relation to their missing loved one.

What have they to be thankful for?

Their loved one is either still missing or, the guilty person or persons are still running around free, escaping justice.

Innocent people are furious their loved one has not been found.
They are raging the perpetrator has not been arrested and charged and cooling their heels in some prison cell for the rest of their miserable lives.
Anything short of finding their loved one and getting justice is simply not acceptable.
They refuse to understand why there is no progress in their case.
They refuse to accept the investigation is essentially completed, after all, how can it be essentially completed when their loved one is still missing and the perpetrator is still out there living a free life?
They will demand the case be kept open.
They will practically camp outside the station in order to know what is going on or, if they remember the slightest thing that could help find their loved one.
Doing nothing is not an option.

Shelving the case or winding it down is not an option, and most certainly not one to be greeted happily by the innocent parents.

If given the chance to keep the case open, YES is the only word expected to be said

Guilty persons however . . . more

Friday, October 23, 2015

Goncalo Amaral Faith Beyond Reason?

Goncalo Amaral maintains he still has faith in the Portuguese justice system. Unless his words are an exercise in rhetoric for the benefit of said system, which they may well be, I find it quite a bizarre thing to come out with given the justice he has received so far.

Anything less than a complete overturn of the award against him, can hardly be called justice.

Can it?

Amaral supporters call time as appeal fund approaches €70,000
Portugal Press
October 22, 2015

For reasons that are remaining very quiet, the friends and supporters of former “Maddie cop” Gonçalo Amaral have called time on the gofundme online appeal set up to fund his legal expenses as he challenges the court decision ordering him to pay the parents of Madeleine McCann over €500,000 in damages.

The Legal Defence for Gonçalo Amaral page will be closing on Wednesday, October 28.

At time of writing, it had already raised over €69,860 and donations were still coming in.

The latest, as of lunchtime today (Thursday), was for €100.

Over the last five months, 2,757 people have responded to the gofundme campaign, set up by a young single mother from Birmingham who was only 14 when Madeleine went missing.

Leanne Baulch, 22, explained to us back in May that she had never imagined the response her initiative received, but she felt compelled to do it as she was “desperate to help” a man she felt was being “persecuted”.

But as the money flowed in, so too did the unpleasantness, including slurs in the British press that the fund was powered by “sick online trolls”.

With Ms Baulch considering her position as a single parent of a toddler, she removed herself from the process altogether a few months ago.

The fund then transferred into the hands of the friends of the former PJ detective whose book, “A Verdade da Mentira”, landed him in the hot seat of litigation - with all his assets, including bank accounts “frozen” - in 2008.

Unpleasantness appears nonetheless to have continued, with internet manipulation of the appeal’s online code so that a few weeks ago, it virtually disappeared from sight (see

Now those in charge of the fund have decided it should close.

Using the headline “Sufficient” - which translated into Portuguese also stands for “Enough” - they have said: “We believe that it is time to close the gofundme page, as the bank account currently stands at an amount that seems largely sufficient to face eventual future expenses”.

A source has confirmed to the Resident that other forms of fundraising remain open, while Amaral’s fundraisers are aware that whatever the result of the latest appeal being considered by Lisbon’s Appellate Court, litigation will continue.

“If Amaral is successful, for example, we remain fairly certain that the McCann’s would appeal that decision. And so it continues. The next step would be the Supreme Court and then after that the Constitutional Court”.

And should Amaral lose the fight which he feels centres on his right to freedom of expression then a new online appeal will be needed to fund a case against Portuguese justice in the European Court of Human Rights.

Thus, for now, it is a case of “serenely awaiting” the next judicial decision, while Amaral’s supporters are no less determined to keep funding avenues open.

Sending out the latest message to subscribers, the group of friends writing collectively said: “May we use this moment to wholeheartedly thank those who have expressed their support for Gonçalo Amaral’s right to an appropriate defence. Whether you have contributed financially or by sending a support message, you have made an impact. You have made a difference”.

As we wrote this article, yet another donation was received as the six-day countdown to closure begins.

Meantime, fund organisers continue to confirm that they will donate any money left unused on legal expenses to a Portuguese children’s charity. Source

That said, there appears to be a rush of donations before the fund closes, some quite considerable.

Thursday, October 15, 2015

Access All Areas by Dr Martin Roberts

 In retrospect there are a couple of topics surrounding this case to which I feel I should have given more attention, the crèche records to mention one and Robert Murat another.

My reasons for not doing so, or my excuse if you will, is that the amount of work I was producing at the time was such, that some areas of this case received less than my undivided attention. In truth the crèche records receiving no attention whatsoever.

But of Murat I can offer no excuse, I committed the cardinal sin, I took him at face value. And if there is one thing this case has taught us, nothing but nothing can be evaluated thus.

There was one occasion however when Murat chinked my hinky meter. After having . . .
"the total and utter destruction of mine and my family's life and caused immense distress"
for which he was duly compensated, later went on to utter this:
Mr Murat said: “It must be a ­tremendously difficult time of year for them and of course as a human being you feel for them and for the loss of their daughter. Express
Now I know it could be a matter of personalities, but had I gone though all the trauma that Murat claims to have experienced, I don't think I would be quite so forgiving, or quite so magnanimous. Far from it. Very far from it. 

Given the subsequent revelations writ below, I conclude that every word that has passed Murat's lips is suspect, and by default must also include anything said by his mother, Jenny Murat.


By Dr Martin Roberts
15 October 2015

On the 4 May, 2007, following the international (no less) announcement of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance from apartment 5A, the Ocean Club literally played ‘open-house’. Robert Murat, who was on the scene and talking to GNR officers that very morning, later said, when questioned as ‘arguido’ on 14 July:
“Together with an officer of the GNR and an employee of the resort with several keys, entered several apartments, opened with the keys or by the tenants in order to locate the child. Some of the apartments were closed and there were no keys, these sites were flagged by the GNR man.

“At that time he met John Hill, manager of MARK WARNER, who supplied them with more keys to other apartments.

“Prior to this occasion, he did not know the interior of the "Ocean Club", only entering the resort after the disappearance.

“In the meantime the tracker dogs arrived that undertook a more rigorous form of search.”
Sure enough. There is a statement on record from Marina Castela (Ocean Club general manager), taken on 16 May, which describes Robert Murat’s entering various apartments as he later said, but not quite the way he said it:
“She saw the suspect, Robert Murat, for the first time on that day at about 12.30 when the witness went to meet GNR officers whom she cannot identify, to open the doors for them and speak to guests staying in apartments in block 6….

“When she was beginning this task together with GNR officers, this individual appeared, she does not know from where, he immediately saw what operations were going on, speaking ostensibly to the guests from the first two apartments, explaining to them what they were doing there, showing much will and anxiety in the transmission of this information.

“Given his behaviour, for a few minutes the witness thought that he belonged to one of the security forces, namely the PJ.

“The GNR officer who was with them did not speak any English nor say anything.

“After the second apartment, the witness says that Robert's attitude was not the most correct, as he spoke to the guests in a very dry and affirmative way and she took the initiative to introduce herself to the clients, not letting him speak.

“She thinks that is the reason why he immediately disappeared and did not accompany them to the rest of the apartments.”
Not exactly the tandem task as described by Murat. John Hill also seems not to have put in an appearance on this occasion either (in his own statement to police of 20 June, he makes no mention of his own activities that day or any interaction with Robert Murat for any purpose whatsoever).

Since Ms Castela describes Murat’s intervention here as occurring shortly after 12.30 p.m., we might suppose that he was dressed in a blue t-shirt and jeans – not because she says so, but because others did.

Sisters Annie Wiltshire and Jayne Jensen were reported (The Sun - 27 December, 2007) to have interacted socially with Robert Murat that very same day (4 May), having not long previously been to the police to report having seen two men acting suspiciously on the ground floor balcony of a supposedly empty (block 5) apartment the afternoon before (3 May). The sisters apparently thought it odd when Murat announced:
‘I must go and shower and change, I’ve been in these clothes all day.’
According to their account, he had been in a striped shirt and grey trousers not long beforehand.

This report was picked up from one first appearing in the Portuguese press (Diario de Noticias). The Sun also tells how the sisters ‘have given an "extensive interview" to cops detailing their suspicions about suspect Robert Murat’ (and of which there is no trace among the files released to the public – perhaps because the sisters apparently voiced their concerns to Leicestershire Police on their return to the UK, and the questionable Spanish agency Metodo 3 subsequently, their information welcomed by that ubiquitous ‘source close to the investigation’).

The reliability of Witshire and Jensen’s further sighting of Robert Murat (outside the apartments on the night of 3 May, and deemed significant by that aforementioned ‘source’) is of less immediate relevance than their description of Robert Murat’s keenness to divest himself of a blue t-shirt, which he had presumably done by the time he made his way to block 6 and his interaction with Maria Castela. Although she had misgivings about his demeanour, she made no comment as to his ‘sweaty’ attire.

Someone who did observe Robert Murat’s style of dress, however, was property manager Barend Weijdom (interviewed by police on 16 May, 2007). He recalled seeing Murat on the morning of 4 May dressed in a yellow shirt and light coloured trousers. These may or may not have been grey, but Weijdom makes no reference to stripes in respect of the shirt (as distinctive a feature as its colour one would imagine).

Blue t-shirt, yellow shirt, striped or otherwise, wearing the garment since breakfast hardly equates to ‘all day’ endurance when scarcely noon. If the Wiltshire-Jensen retelling has any substance, then there is something odd about Murat’s apologia to them, just as there would seem to be about his inspection story, as it relates to Block 6 at least, especially since none of the GNR officers interviewed, including dog handlers, recorded having been in the company of one Robert Murat that morning, 4 May. But someone else did.

Barend Weijdom’s role as property manager saw him responsible for apartment 5E, which, like 5J diagonally above it, was unoccupied at the time. Such was his professional concern, that on the morning of the 4th he suggested to the authorities that they check it out, in case it too had been entered inappropriately (the McCanns having first reported a break-in don’t forget). The core of Weijdom’s statement is particularly germane:
“He went to the apartment with a GNR officer and after a few seconds Robert Murat also entered the apartment without anyone having requested his presence.

“The witness says that he found Murat's presence in the apartment to be strange, adding that after he entered the apartment he gave the witness a 'pat on the side' and said 'thanks for your collaboration'. During this situation the witness thought that Murat worked for the police. On that morning the witness saw Murat moving around the site a lot…”
Here, at last, we have Robert Murat entering an Ocean Club apartment in the company of a GNR officer and one other. Except he didn’t. He followed them inside. And far from being an Ocean Club employee brandishing a set of keys, Weijdom was an independent operator, making use of one key in his possession. (It seems as if Murat has deliberately conflated his experience at 5E with that of his later visit to block 6).

Robert Murat’s explanation of his activities in relation to this sorry tale are therefore inaccurate, and not for the first time. Weijdom’s brief account enables us to draw a few pertinent conclusions besides.

Murat’s attention grabbing (‘Look at me, I’m a policeman’) behaviour, enacted in the presence of Maria Castela and her GNR associates at Block 6 on the Friday afternoon, had first been practised in and around block 5 that same morning. Apartment 5E was one of six in block 5 that were not in Mark Warner’s custody, so to speak (E, F, G, J, N, O were not on cleaner Maria da Silva’s rosta). Since we know that 5G was occupied by its owner, Mrs Fenn, and that responsibility for 5E had been delegated to Barend Weijdom (who had a key to the place), it seems only reasonable to suppose that 5J, also known to have been empty for quite a period of time, was itself owned in absentia, and the key left in the charge of a local ‘manager’ (such as Barend Weijdom, for example).

We don’t really know what Robert Murat was wearing that morning; the different accounts conflict. We can however tell that his self-aggrandizing explanation for his presence in and around the Ocean Club on Friday 4 May is an exaggeration at the very least, a lie at worst, as is his claim, again made during his ‘arguido’ interview that:

“never in his life has he entered the apartment where Madeleine was when she disappeared, neither before nor after the events under investigation."
‘Never’ was a rather dangerous word to use under the circumstances, especially when one considers Weijdom’s further evidence:
“On that morning the witness saw Murat moving around the site a lot and saw him enter and leave the apartment Madeleine disappeared from, without knowing whether he was with anyone there. He said that Murat moved a lot between the authorities and journalists.”
Indeed the witness testimony of conscientious Barend Weijdom should be given more than merely due regard:
“He heard about the news being investigated on the evening of 3rd May at about 21.30 - 21.40 from P**** B******, a Dutchman and owner of the Atlantico restaurant, who passed by the witness near the Baptista supermarket, in P da L and who asked for his help in searching for Madeleine.

“He then went to the place where the events occurred which was at about 21.45 - 21.50. At this time various local people and MW staff were present.”
When did Kate McCann say she did her ‘check’ again?

Martin Roberts

Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Metropolitan Police Service Leicester Constabulary UK Home Office We The People

Metropolitan Police Service, Leicester Constabulary, UK Home Office. We the people are going to be on the right side of history. Are you?

Whatever stunts you have pulled in the past and plan to pull in the future, all will be to no avail.

Because I can say one thing without fear of contradiction, we shall be proved right before you are. It cannot be otherwise. As well you know.

There is only one truth, and that truth will out.

Appeal to raise money for Maddie cop’s legal costs gets huge cash boost
Portugal Resident
September 22 2015

An anonymous group of Portuguese “business and legal workers” have ploughed over €11,000 (£8000) into the online appeal set up by a young single mother to raise money for beleaguered ex-Maddie cop Gonçalo Amaral. Amaral’s appeal against the €600,000 in damages awarded against him in the civil case taken out by the parents of missing Madeleine is due to be decided by Lisbon’s Appellate Court “any day now”.

The cash boost has brought the Legal Defence for Gonçalo Amaral to over €65,000 (£47,010).

Donated in the Portuguese language, the text claims to be from “an anonymous group of business and legal workers who are appalled by what has happened”.

It continues: “Portugal and Britain are old allies, but the McCanns and the British gutter press have tried to drive a wedge between us.

“We can all see what they are trying to do, freezing Dr Amaral’s assets to prevent him from defending himself, whilst using the donated millions to sue him.

“That is not justice. It is not right.

“The McCanns lost five out of the seven issues, but the British press has not reported that, nor the strong terms used by the judge against their so called ‘evidence’.

“They have to pay 60% of the costs, but the British press has not reported that” either, the text continues, stressing that “this small donation is to ensure that this act of hate and venom does not succeed”.

The donation - arriving in the legal fund in two chunks on Tuesday morning - has been widely shared on social media where a veritable avalanche of support for Amaral has accompanied him for the past eight years. But so far it has been ignored by the British mainstream media.

As to the former PJ detective’s appeal against the ruling that effectively orders him to pay the McCann’s over €600,000 in damages, that is advancing now through the Appellate Court in Lisbon.

As a friend of the former detective’s explained, “it is not a public process. There is no court date.

“At some point, the judges reach a verdict and then they communicate that verdict to all parties. There is however no deadline. It may take weeks or months until we hear anything”.

More Exaro

Friday, September 18, 2015

Metaphoric Comprehension Revisited by Dr Martin Roberts

For your contemplation, another thought provoking hypothesis from the pen of Martin Roberts.

How near the mark it is I couldn't say, but it would go a awful long way in explaining the anomalous behaviour of successive governments in relation to two hitherto unknown chav medics from the boonies.

It might also go some distance in explaining the totally unbefitting arrogance of the last persons to see Madeleine alive and in whose care she "disappeared",  the parents, Kate and Gerry McCann.


 By Dr Martin Roberts
18 September 2015

Attention switching

Pitiful though it may appear to some, I cannot help but notice certain similarities between ostensibly unrelated events. I mean, whatever can the tragedy of 9/11 have in common with the disappearance of Madeleine McCann?

One notable aspect, for me at least, is the common purpose shared by the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST for short), whose report into the collapse of the ‘Twin Towers’ was commissioned by the US administration, and Operation Grange, funded, open-endedly it seems, by the UK government. Both are indisputably endeavours to impose upon the general public an official account of what happened in each case – to the World Trade Centre buildings on the one hand, Madeleine McCann on the other. Both are gratuitously disingenuous. So much so that it hardly takes a leap of logic to infer that the truth must still be ‘out there’, since it is nowhere represented by either of these officially sanctioned undertakings.

However, for the sake of parsimony if nothing else, we should confine discussion to the McCann affair and the misdirection inherent in it.

To quote briefly from a recent facebook/forum comment:

“There is no way on this earth that two insignificant doctors and their holiday companions would be protected by the full might of the British government. Some other event was happening in Praia de Luz that week and that some of those in attendance were powerful movers and shakers who needed to be protected at all costs.

“…some seeking the answer to Madeleine's disappearance will be disappointed if the reason for the protection does not lead to a high level paedophile gang. But it won’t because it isn't the reason.”

Of course there are those who adhere to the notion that the McCanns have accomplished all they have by virtue of their being no more than sharp opportunists, who happened to have had their hands on a few useful professional levers and have gone onto greater things inside the signal box since. The battleground for argument here is usually the explicit exemplars of officialdom’s having taken the couple’s part so readily. ‘Extraordinary!’ cry the conspiracy theorists. ‘Par for the course,’ claim the debunkers. But what of a smaller skirmish about which very little has so far been said?

However influential the McCanns and their T7 allies may or may not have been, it is difficult to see how they might have convinced two Police investigators into the McCann disappearance, one of them a senior and well respected officer in the field of missing persons enquiries, that their future careers lay elsewhere – outside the UK even. I refer of course to Martin Grime (now working with the FBI) and Mark Harrison (now a Police Commander in Australia). How did Team McCann accomplish that?

Our anonymous commentator is of the opinion that some powerful entity outside the McCann circle required protection, but not on account of their association with any paedophile ring. That wasn’t the reason. Which begs the obvious question: ‘What was the reason’?

Apparently, “Some other event was happening in Praia de Luz that week and some of those in attendance were powerful movers and shakers who needed to be protected at all costs.”

For ‘abduction by paedophiles’ one might read ‘destroyed by hijacked aircraft’, since both propositions share the same degree of verisimilitude. Operation Grange have of course adopted the fallback position of ‘body snatching by burglars’, in an attempt to incorporate the small detail of Madeleine McCann’s being dead at the time of departure - about as credible as NIST’s computer modelling of the collapse of WTC7, or indeed any of the hundreds of pages that make up the 9/11 Commission Report, for which countless trees were needlessly sacrificed. (Ed see below)

The inevitable lure here, and the one which has engaged so many for so long, is the urge to get to the bottom of what really happened to Madeleine McCann. And this, with the added frisson of possible misdemeanour involving high status individuals, has, for nearly a decade, successfully steered all our gazes away from the true fulcrum of the drama being played out in the Portuguese Algarve. As per the comment above: “Some other event was happening in Praia de Luz that week.” A ‘tomato fest’ it was not.

Keeping secrets

Certain students of the McCann case, as seen through the eyes of the media for the most part, have derided Goncalo Amaral’s repeated assertions that secret service activities lay behind the ruinous political intervention into the police investigation of which he was co-ordinator. Such a view establishes him as a ‘totem’ for conspiracy theorists, who, according to these learned others, lack a firm grasp of reality. Far too many people (‘three score and ten’?) would have to have been involved for it to work, and they couldn’t all keep a secret could they? Not like the thousands employed at Bletchley Park during the Second World War, or the hundred thousand engaged on the Manhattan Project in the USA, where President Truman was over a week in office before he knew anything about it ( (Ed see below)  Then of course we have that inglorious September date in 2001. Has anyone from the directorate ‘squealed’ about that one yet? (And don’t, for goodness’ sake, imagine that’s because there’s nothing to reveal).

Of all those whose opinions concerning the McCann case might be taken seriously, Goncalo Amaral is out in front by a country mile. He was slap bang in the middle of proceedings at the time. So if he reports that a UK police officer (Mark Harrison as it happens) was intercepted by MI5 at Faro Airport then it’s ‘odds on’ the event occurred. So we might ask ourselves, were MI5 tagging along with the diplomatic invasion, like so many opportunist refugees, just in case the people thought by Kate McCann to have been ‘spying’ on her family that week should have absconded with some living embodiment of a state secret or two? Or were they already there?

It’s safe to say that a lot of people were in the Algarve at the time of Madeleine McCann’s disappearance, no doubt representing a variety of nationalities. The T7 were known to each other, but not to fellow diners at the Tapas Restaurant. Even newly-arrived Robert Murat, whose mother’s house was just a short walk from the Ocean Club, was a complete stranger to some, whilst Martin Smith had only seen him on a couple of occasions.

A small township populated by all sorts and frequented by strangers then. Perhaps we should not be surprised therefore at the McCann appeal for holiday-makers at the time to submit to CEOP (led of course by Jim Gamble) any photos that featured unfamiliar faces – you know, the sort of family snap you happen to take just as someone else wanders into view.

Despite Gerry McCann’s personal mantra about the importance of ‘getting information into the investigation’, no photographs trawled in this manner were ever passed onto the PJ, who were conducting it. Furthermore, according to Kate McCann (Crimewatch, June 2007), "Probably about 60% of tourists to this area are British, but following that are the Germans and then the Dutch.” But then we have Gerry’s ‘blog’ of 9 June, 2007, in which he tells us:

“After returning from the beach we did the Irish version of Crimewatch -'Crimecall'. There are a lot of Irish tourists in and around Praia da Luz and although the awareness of Madeleine's disappearance in Ireland is extremely high, we want to ensure that everyone is aware of the appeal and we want the Irish public to come forward with photographs of people who they do not know who were in and around Praia da Luz in the 2 weeks leading up to the 3rd May.”

The Smith family members, whose ‘sighting’ seems to have been of some significance, are of course Irish. Maybe friends of theirs had inadvertently secured an image of the same ‘abductor’ during daylight hours? More generally, and much more likely, such an Irish photographic ‘accident’ might have involved another Irish individual, most probably at a venue frequented by Irish ‘tourists’.

The McCanns and their ‘Tapas’ friends arrived in Praia da Luz over the weekend 28/29 April. Madeleine McCann was publicly reported missing on May 3, whereafter Kate McCann was quite sure ‘They’d been watching us for days’ (well it couldn’t have been a week!). And yet the McCanns, CEOP, and in all likelihood Jim Gamble, who had rather more than one string to his professional bow at the time, were interested in photographs featuring people ‘in and around Praia da Luz in the 2 weeks leading up to the 3rd May’. That’s over a week before the McCanns even arrived.

What surreptitious activity might the suspected abductor(s) have been up to prior to watching the McCanns for a few days? Did they know the McCanns were coming? Had they access to their booking arrangements? Did they take time to reconnoitre likely vantage points for surveillance perhaps? Of course not. Yet someone of interest must have been there, otherwise there would have been no chance of their being captured on film, and concomitantly no point to the appeal for photographs.

The first rule of survival 

‘Take care of no. 1’. It follows that, on a national scale, the first priority of a state is to see to matters of state. And what might matter to the state is not the domestic fate of a young child abroad, nor the criminality, if such it be, of that child’s parents. Thus, faced with the rejection of FOI requests on the grounds that to respond could jeopardize international relations, are we not bound to infer that what was actually being safeguarded was not the good names of a rag-tag bunch of middle-class medics? (See: “A Magical Mystery Tour” and “‘Mad Cow’ Legislation” – McCannfiles, October/November 2009).

So what was happening that spring, in Praia da Luz particularly or the Portuguese Algarve in general, that was neither a tomato fest nor a child abduction? Whatever it was, it was of international significance. Did it have something to do with the Lisbon Treaty perhaps? Nope. That was not signed until December. The Freeport scandal coming to a head? Well that certainly had an international dimension, but it’s difficult to see any immediate connection with the very immediate steps taken to submerge the McCann affair. What say we look at another chain of ‘incidents’ altogether, working backward from 2012?

This from The Portugal News Online of 15 November that year (

“The trial of five men accused of trafficking weapons to supply a dissident faction of the IRA – the Real IRA (RIRA) – began in the Algarve last week under a blanket of tight security.

“Three men from Northern Ireland and two Portuguese nationals are implicated in the case, which dates back to July 2011, when a PJ counter-terrorism unit swooped on a campsite in Olhão and dismantled the set-up.

“Three of the suspects are being held in Portugal, one remains free and the fifth suspect is in Ireland where he is facing extradition.” 

The arrests were in fact reported in the Guardian at the time they occurred (10 July -

Continuing with The Portugal News Online:

“It is not the first time RIRA activity has been exposed in the Algarve. In 2009 two men believed to belong to the Real IRA were found to be using a restaurant in the small fishing village of Alvor as a main European base.

“It was at the Panda Grill on the fringe of the village that Paul Anthony McCaugherty and Michael Gregory allegedly negotiated the buying and selling of weapons for the Real IRA, between 2005 and 2006.”

The Telegraph (30.6.2010) explained that these 2009 arrests had proceeded to trial and that

“The trial had heard that the Real IRA was using a restaurant on the Algarve in Portugal as a global hub for weapons shipments to Ireland. McCaugherty met the agent in Portugal and in a number of other locations including Amsterdam and Istanbul.” (

Fully five years ago yet another ‘anonymous donor’ left a comment on a popular blog to the following effect:

“Anonymous 23 April 2010 20:34:00

“In my opinion, Jim Gamble was not looking for photos of possible abductors. He was looking for photos that could have identified MI5 operatives. There is a trial scheduled to take place this month (April 2010) in regard to the Real IRA activities in the Algarve. It may not have to do with that case….”

On the other hand it just might.

Given these suspects were only arrested in 2009, in relation to criminal activities conducted between 2005 and 2006, what were they doing in the intervening period – and where were they doing it? A quick look at the map reveals that the ‘small fishing village of Alvor’, otherwise a European base of operations for illegal arms trafficking, is just beyond the headland from Luz, to the other side of Lagos.

And that ‘agent’ the accused was supposed to have met? The Telegraph (30.6.2010) again explains:

“Paul McCaugherty, 43, was caught trying to buy an arsenal of weapons from an undercover agent posing as a Middle Eastern arms dealer.

“The Security Service agent, known as Ali, spent two years meeting McCaugherty and bugging 90 hours of conversations which became the cornerstone of the prosecution’s case at Belfast Crown Court.”

No one was arrested until 2009 remember, which means that this operation was on-going during 2007, the year the McCanns decided to visit the Algarve. And let’s not overlook the headline afterwards carried by the Telegraph (30.6.2010):

Real IRA commander caught in MI5 arms dealing sting

A Real IRA commander has been convicted of attempting to smuggle weapons and explosives into Northern Ireland after being snared by a daring MI5 sting operation. 

From which it is abundantly clear that MI5 didn’t just wander into the Algarve in the wake of the McCanns. They were already there, and had been for some considerable time.

A stitch in time

Picking up on the earlier perspicacity of ‘Anonymous’, as demonstrated on 23 April that year (2010), if there is one thing about which the security services are undeniably scrupulous it is protection of their assets’ identities, and for very good reason.

Examples of this concern (or lack thereof) are to be found in the furore following members of the Bush administration’s deliberately, and maliciously, ‘outing’ CIA field agent Valerie Plame Wilson, simply to spite her husband, a diplomat who had taken a very public moral stand against US foreign policy in the Middle-East. (Ed. Joe Wilson husband of Valerie Plame revues Bush's memoir link)  On the home front, MI5’s eventual willingness to share CCTV images of two of the alleged 7/7 bombers was counterbalanced by their ‘cropping’ the pictures in such a way as to make reliable identification of the individuals nigh-on impossible.

But that’s just for context. What we have for more immediate consideration is an on-going MI5 operation in the Portuguese Algarve, where suddenly, and without prior warning, Police activity is about to go into overdrive, possibly giving locally based targets entirely the wrong impression that they are on the point of being ‘rumbled’ (a moment that was still two years hence), and jeopardizing years of investment in under-cover infiltration in the process. Not to mention the risk of ‘Ali’s being recognised in a context other than that of his role as a putative arms dealer.

Such would have been the situation had the PJ acted without media or other intrusion on the occasion of Madeleine McCann’s ‘disappearance’.

But isn’t that what they did?

Not really. It’s what they did on the night of May 3rd.

Now consider a UK government and its security services appraised of the possibility of such imminent turmoil before it actually kicked off. Say, a few days before. Time in which to delay ‘abduction’ (in lieu of a death) and instruct ‘Ali’, for example, to adopt a low profile elsewhere for the time being. Police spot checks throughout the Algarve would be inevitable, but significant others would at least be out of the firing line. Had the Portuguese been called to action stations without prior reference to MI5 they would have taken everyone unawares, not just Madeleine McCann’s abductor, had there been one that is.

So Madeleine, instead of dying on the Monday, is abducted, as planned, on the Thursday, giving MI5 the breathing space it needed to manage its own activities in readiness. The very prompt (and loud) international media revelation of Madeleine McCann’s abduction ensured that television watchers everywhere would then know why the PJ, the GNR, and all those helicopters, were suddenly so busy, even those who might have been watching in Alvora, and who obviously hadn’t kidnapped anyone.

I know, I know, ‘if this weren’t so pitiful it would be funny’. But there is a paradox attaching to Madeleine’s disappearance which has yet to be addressed by anyone as far as I am aware, and it is this:

If Madeleine McCann was ‘abducted’ in a hurry on the Thursday night, there was not enough time for her to have lain dead beforehand. And if she died earlier that week, then why would Gerry McCann have waited several days before removing the evidence, only to snatch her corpse out bed at the last minute, just before his wife raised the alarm. The reason for the delay, I suggest, was someone else’s.

And let us not overlook the very significant role in proceedings played by Jim Gamble of CEOP, both at the time and since. Who really conjured up the notion of an extreme paedophile operating in Portugal (Madeleine McCann was barely four years old don’t forget), and who, not long previously, had been steeped in the dark practices of the security services in Northern Ireland?

MI5 eventually secured their targets. The McCanns have their ‘hush money’. And Operation Grange is probably just this current financial year away from ‘capping’ the entire episode like a toxic well (they would have done so sooner had a credible reconciliation been available - remember DCI Redwood’s admission that ‘solution’ was not on the menu?). Oh, and in the wake of the ‘St Andrews Agreement’, the Northern Ireland Assembly was restored and a new Northern Ireland Executive formed - on 8 May 2007.

The chances of the McCanns ever appearing in court as accused parties are exactly those of their daughter being returned to them by an abductor – NIL. Otherwise they would be standing before the judge as accomplices to a deception perpetrated by the very government on whose behalf they were being prosecuted! Or are we also to believe that NORAD could be blind-sided, the Pentagon attacked, and some of Manhattan’s premier real estate flattened by a bunch of dissident Saudis squatting in an Afghan cave?

Martin Roberts


Ed: If after all these years you are still of the opinion that the Twin Towers were knocked down by a bunch of Arabs who couldn't even fly a Cessna, then I suggest you watch this.

If after watching it you are still of that opinion, then I suggest you hand in that part of your cerebral cortex that is redundant.

Monday, September 07, 2015

Something's Gotta Give The Status Quo of the McCann Case

Excellent article, though for my money, a tad too forgiving of the Metropolitan Police Service, and by default, the Home Office.

Something's Gotta Give
Cristobell Hutton
7 September 2015

The cost element is a good ruse to get the public on board in calls for the Madeleine investigation to be shelved. The £11/12million and 4 long years is wholly disproportionate to the original crime. No country or police force has ever committed so much money and manpower to finding one small child. Police filing cabinets the world over have sections filled with unsolvable and cold cases, crimes for which there is not enough evidence to bring a prosecution, even though the detectives have a good idea who the perpetrators are. The good guys don't always win.

The McCanns, like the parents of Jonbenet Ramsey, have money and connections, and like the Ramseys, they have been able to counter accusations against themselves with a slick, organised campaign of misinformation to protect themselves and point the finger of blame elsewhere. Like the McCanns, the Ramseys were even able to employ former 'respected' policemen and detectives to create scenarios and documentaries to support their claims that they were innocent victims and that a stranger murdered their daughter. So powerful and successful were the Ramseys that no charges were ever brought against them.

The Ramseys however, did not have to face the power of the internet or the full force of public opinion. Like the McCanns, they were able to maintain control of what was published in the mainstream media through litigation, but they didn't have to contend with the police releasing their original files into the public domain, and Jonbenet's Avenger, former lead detective Steve Thomas, did not have the worldwide support that Goncalo Amaral has, and his book was not shared by thousands online. For Team McCann, all their planted stories of known predators, egg men, spotty men and ugly men, are deconstructed and disassembled by armchair detectives within moments, Unfortunately for them, the audience they created when Madeleine disappeared has stuck, but they are a more enlightened and sophisticated audience than that of the Ramseys, and they know all the details.

If we step back from the propaganda and the spin that surrounds this case and look at similar cases of claimed child abduction, we can see that the case of missing Madeleine is not so unique. I doubt the McCanns will object to being compared to the parents of Jonbenet Ramsey, but the exact circumstances are probably more comparable to Lisa Irwin and Isabel Celis. These cases, it could be said, are going nowhere. The parents are not co-operating with the police, and the police are not looking for abductors, the present position is stalemate. The parents in these cases are also running 'get their daughters home campaigns' and Funds with huge clouds of suspicion over their heads.

In the case of missing Madeleine however, there are two live police investigations and there are no signs that the police, either here in the UK or in Portugal are looking for a live child, a paedophile gang or a lone abductor. There is not now, and never has been, any urgency in what they are doing - if they believed Madeleine was alive and other children were at risk, then catching the 'abductor' would be their top priority, and they wouldn't take 4+ years to do it. If another child were abducted or murdered in the meantime, then their laissez faire attitude would be unforgivable. More

Sunday, September 06, 2015

Madeleine On Her Mind

A powerful and quite unique piece of writing.

Kate McCann finishes charity bike ride with 'Madeleine on her mind' 

Ponderings of a Hobnob
Thursday, June 18, 2015

. . . . . Then the last marble makes its appearance, we have the classic comment that reveals you for the desperate liars you are:"there is no evidence to the contrary,'' Except, there is, no matter how much you deny and

There is the evidence of blood and body fluids in the apartment and hire car.

There are the reactions of the blood and cadaver dogs Eddie and Keela behind the sofa, in your wardrobe, the child's red t-shirt, your black and white checked pants oh, and not forgetting, Cuddle Cat.

If, as you say, there is not evidence to the contrary, why then did you, your family and friends and, even dear, dear clarrie come up with explanations for what was found.

Dirty diapers, sweaty sandals, rotting meat and fish, garbage. Maddie falling over in the apartment hurting herself (you can thank gerry for that contribution) though it would not be your fault.
"And if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment – why would that be our fault"? Nose bleeds, even the laughable coming into contact with multiple dead patients before your vacation hence the contamination.

What there is no evidence of, even after eight years and investigation by both the PJ and SY, is abduction.

Not one fingerprint, palm print, foot print even ear print.
Not one fibre
Not one hair
Not one skin cell, drop of sweat, tears or semen by a stranger.
No reliable eyewitness.
No one hearing the sound of a shutter being raised or lowered on a quiet night standing feet away from the apartment.
No one hearing the sound of someone walking away quickly in a silent street.Nothing, zilch, nada!

Nothing that shows a stranger got into the apartment and abducted Maddie.

Remember it is not only what is there that shouldn't be.
It is also what isn't there that should be.

I do wonder though how your coming into contact with multiple dead bodies would result in cadaverine on a child's red t-shirt and cuddlecat.

Contact transfer wouldn't work since all items that came into contact with your clothes would have been tainted.

Claiming that perhaps you took Cuddle Cat to work with you is just plain unbelievable.

If it was Maddie's favorite toy, her comforter, why would you deprive her of it and take it to work?

How could you have taken it to work prior to the vacation if it was an early birthday present from a relative?

Why would someone claim it was an early birthday present when perhaps she had had it for some time and was her favorite comforter?

Did he not remember his script? . . . . more

Saturday, September 05, 2015

Nice Company Home Secretary

I have so far, though that may well change, resisted the will to produce an illustrated version that would tear to shreds this catalogue of lies, deceit and vulgarities, aka the writings of Gerry McCann.

There are those among us that might argue why the guilty would press for a review of this case?

Equally, a similar question may have been asked of Stalin: Why bother with all these (show) trials when you already know the outcome?

when you already know the outcome Or in the case of the McCanns, what that outcome will be.

And that outcome, as well we know, goes by the name of Operation Grange.

And if you think otherwise, that somehow Grange is a bona fide investigation, then quite frankly, you are insane. (Does the photo below not say anything to you?)

I need say no more, do I?

Other than perhaps, the best is yet to come.

And by best, I don't mean the best possible outcome, I mean something so outlandish that it will, across this land far and wide, provoke such a response that the already immortal words of John McEnroe will become etched in stone and forever be synonymous with whatever it is that the present government will attempt to foist upon us.

Theresa May, Home Secretary. Known associate of Kate McCann.
Shame about the body language Theresa, it's a bit telling.
In fact it is more than a bit telling, it is a revelation. 
 Some might even say it makes you look complicit, but I couldn't possibly comment.

Search for Madeleine - Letter in full from McCanns calling for petition

3 November 2010 10:28 GMT

This is the full text of the letter urging people to support the McCanns' petition.

Dear Friends and Supporters,

As I write, it is exactly three and a half years since our daughter Madeleine was so cruelly taken from us.

Three and a half years without her seeing her brother, her sister, her Mummy, her Daddy or her best friends.

We are still searching for her. Our small team continues to review all available information, even though we STILL don't have access to ALL of the information that the UK and Portugese [sic] authorities have. Our team has interviewed hundreds of witnesses, received over 1,000 calls, dealt with over 15,000 emails and maintained a computerised database of all information they have received. Despite the difficulties resulting from lack of official assistance, they "follow up" all new leads to try and get fresh information into the investigation.

It is incredible to think that for the last two years and three months NO police force has proactively been doing anything to help us find Madeleine. Crucially, there has been NO formal review of the material held by the police authorities - which is routine practice in most countries, and especially when a key piece of the "jigsaw" may have been overlooked.

We have tried in vain to get the authorities to play their part but our requests have seemingly fallen on deaf ears. It is simply not acceptable that they have, to all intents and purposes, given up on Madeleine. We need the authorities to do more.

However we know we are not alone. We have the tremendous support of family, friends and of course you the public. A lot of this support comes in the form of people saying to us, "if there's anything we can do, just let us know" or "I'd like to help but I don't know how". To these people, and indeed yourself, my plea is simple.

We need your support to continue to lobby the British and Portugese [sic] governments to undertake a joint or independent review of Madeleine's case.

How can you do this?

Simply visit: and sign the petition to call on the UK and Portugese [sic] authorities to conduct an independent and transparent review of all information in relation to the disappearance of Madeleine. And in turn, please spread the word and encourage as many others to do the same. Together we can, and will pull all of the loose ends of Madeleine's case together and find her.

Thank you

Another way you can show your support is by continuing to help us fund the search for Madeleine.

To carry on searching for Madeleine and to ensure that the process has continued in a meaningful and proactive way, we have been able to utilise the generous donations paid in to Madeleine's Fund by the general public, libel damages paid to ourselves and our friends and money raised through a variety of fundraising efforts.

The fund has allowed:

- Our investigation team of ex-police officers to operate and conduct enquiries in the UK, Portugal and further afield.

- A Portugese [sic] assistant/translator

- A 24 hour telephone line with translators to receive information from the public

- Media liaison in Portugal and the UK to ensure that we convey the simple factual messages: there is absolutely no evidence that Madeleine has been physically harmed; we must keep looking for her and those who took her.

- Awareness campaigns in Portugal, Spain and further afield.

- Website hosting and development and social network site campaigns to raise awareness through the internet

- A part-time campaign coordinator

As I write this letter, if Madeleine's Fund remains as it is, with the current rate of expenditure, it will run out in Spring 2011. This would essentially mean that any kind of proactive search for Madeleine would cease. So again we need your help. If you can, please consider donating to Madeleine's fund at

- £1 pays for the multi-lingual call centre availability for 1 hour

- £2 per month pays for 12 travel packs that are distributed to holidaymakers going all over the world

- £10 pays for 1000 posters that are translated and distributed across the world

- £25 pays for the access to a 24 hour multi-lingual telephone service for 1 day

- £50 pays for the running costs of investigation office (and staff) for 2 hours

- £400 pays for 10,000 multi-lingual prayer cards for Madeleine, with photograph and contact details

Someone knows what has happened to Madeleine. We simply need to reach that person. We need to obtain that key piece of information, that "missing piece of the jigsaw". One call may be all we need to find Madeleine and who took her.

Our little girl is now seven years old: innocent, vulnerable and waiting to be found. Please, please sign the petition and help us to find her.

Gerry McCann
H/T Maren

Which part of this do people not understand?

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

Miriam Hyman Collateral Damage?

Another extremely thoughtful and well argued piece from the inimitable Martin Roberts.

Miriam Hyman Collateral Damage?

By Dr Martin Roberts
19 August 2015

Death and the maiden

The story of Miriam Hyman’s death on the morning of Thursday July 7, 2005 is reminiscent of the John Ford movie ‘The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance’, insofar as the genuine executioner is not the one the audience are led to believe did the deed.

Miriam is understood to have been one of thirteen victims of the explosion aboard a no. 30 bus in London’s Tavistock square that occurred at 9.47 a.m. on the morning in question. Her parents realised she was missing and unaccounted for later that day and, in the course of their distress, proceeded to give interviews to the media, who reported as follows:
(John Hyman): "She certainly wasn't injured on the Underground because I spoke to her and at that time she was with a crowd of people evacuated from trains on the pavement outside King's Cross station. The only other possibility, apart from a road accident, is if she was on the bus that was blown up. The reason we think that is unlikely is because it wouldn't make sense for her to take that route. And I was speaking to her about that time and her office ‘phoned her at about 10 a.m., which was about 10 minutes after the explosion to say 'don't come in'. We think maybe she has gone into shock. Her mobile is off. She could have walked away from her handbag in shock. I think she's still in the Greater London area because when I checked yesterday afternoon her car was still in the local station car park." (The Independent, 10 July 2005).
The article continues:
"We would be gibbering wrecks if it weren't for those two ‘phone calls which give us a lot of hope.”
Likewise the International Herald Tribune (11 July 2005) reported:
‘John Hyman, whose 32-year-old daughter, Miriam, is missing, knows a few things for certain: She was not wounded when she left the Underground. She was not on the bus because the bus exploded at about the time he was on the ‘phone with her. Soon after, she called her workplace, and was told not to bother to come in. That was at 10 a.m., after the attacks, he said.

‘"I don't see how she could have got into the bus that exploded," he said. "And the route makes no sense, whether she's going to work or home." Her cellphone goes unanswered. Hyman's friends have papered the town with her image and raced to hospitals.’Miriam’s mother Mavis was quoted to similar effect by the Jewish Journal of 14 July:

‘Other Jewish families face an agonizing wait. Miriam Hyman, 32, a freelance photo editor, called her father, John, from King’s Cross Station at 9:45 a.m. Thursday to say she was all right. That was the last anyone has heard from her. After a fruitless search of London’s hospitals, “we are just waiting,” Hyman’s mother, Mavis, told JTA. ‘She ‘phoned work to say she was going to be late, she was still obviously determined to get in. I think she didn’t understand the seriousness of what was going on.’

‘Something Jewish’ picked up on corroboration given to the Sun Newspaper earlier by Miriam’s sister Esther. They (SJ) posted (11 July 2005):

‘Speaking to the Sun newspaper, her sister Esther said: "Something is stopping her answering the ‘phone or contacting us. It’s so scary because my dad spoke to her as soon as he heard about the bombs. She told him she was sitting on the pavement outside King’s Cross after her train had been evacuated at the station. We have heard nothing since and are frantic.”’

Matters arising

The first detail to bring attention to here is this observation on the part of John Hyman:
“The only other possibility, apart from a road accident, is if she was on the bus that was blown up. The reason we think that is unlikely is because it wouldn't make sense for her to take that route. And I was speaking to her about that time.”

Discounting any road accident (there were none involving pedestrian fatalities that day), Miriam was thought unlikely to have caught the doomed no. 30 bus anywhere near Euston Station for two reasons. First, her intended destination lay in the opposite direction, and second, she had only just concluded a ‘phone conversation with her father while outside King’s Cross (the bus had already left from Euston approximately half-a-mile away).

Things get more puzzling from here on in.
Esther Hyman: “It’s so scary because my dad spoke to her as soon as he heard about the bombs.”
Implying that Miriam’s anxious father rang to speak to her, as one might reasonably expect.

The Jewish Journal, however, would have it that: ‘Miriam Hyman, 32, a freelance photo editor, called her father, John, from King’s Cross Station at 9:45 a.m. Thursday to say she was all right. From her mother Mavis we learn “That was the last anyone has heard from her.”

Not, perhaps, a significant contradiction, but then there are others, which, given a common family origin for the story, are perplexing.

John Hyman (quoted in the Independent):
“And I was speaking to her about that time and her office ‘phoned her at about 10 a.m., which was about 10 minutes after the explosion to say 'don't come in.'”
Whereas the Herald Tribune’s report of Miriam’s conversation with her father proceeds:
‘soon after, she called her workplace, and was told not to bother to come in. That was at 10 a.m., after the attacks, he said.’
This was apparently echoed by Miriam’s mother in the Jewish Journal:

“Hyman’s mother, Mavis, told JTA.  
‘She ‘phoned work to say she was going to be late, she was still obviously determined to get in.”
Again, the directionality of the call might be considered of less importance than the fact of its occurrence. However, the one speaks to the other, metaphorically as well as literally, particularly in light of John Hyman’s remark:
"We would be gibbering wrecks if it weren't for those two ‘phone calls which give us a lot of hope.”
Irrespective of who dialled whom, once John Hyman’s conversation with his daughter was concluded and Miriam went on to speak to her colleague(s) at work (at 10.00 a.m. or thereabouts), how did either John or Mavis Hyman come to learn of that all-too-significant second call, given Esther’s statement that they had had no word of Miriam since the initial (9.45 a.m.) conversation (“She told him she was sitting on the pavement outside King’s Cross…..We have heard nothing since and are frantic.”’)?

‘“We are just waiting,” Hyman’s mother, Mavis, told JTA.’

That remark was published on 14 July, by which time, according to journalists Becky Barrow and Amy Iggulden (“Families receive the news that destroys all hope”), the Hymans had already been advised (13 July) of their daughter’s death (The Telegraph, 14 July 2005). In point of fact they knew by the 11th, as reported by the Jewish Chronicle Online (29.4.2010) and by Esther Hyman personally in an on-line video posted by the Guardian (6.5.2011) wherein she states: “So, we waited until the Monday and our family liaison officer came here and explained to my parents that ‘Mim’ had been identified by her dental records.”

All of which makes the appearance of Mavis Hyman’s ‘we are waiting‘ statement in the Jewish Journal afterwards rather difficult to understand.

The question as to how any of Miriam Hyman’s relatives could have been appraised of any subsequent cell ‘phone call of hers, whether to or from her place of work, remains unresolved however. It is a ‘phone call of the utmost significance, and not just because any such conversation at 10.00 a.m. that morning would rule Miriam out completely as having been a passenger aboard the devastated no. 30 bus.

In actual fact, the significance attaching to the ‘phone call between Miriam Hyman and her office does not reside in the ‘phone call per se, but in her work‘s location – Canary Wharf.

Trouble in the East-end 

Mid-morning on 7 July saw a solitary Radio Five broadcast recounting news of a shooting carried out by security services at Canary Wharf. The announcement was never repeated, although various news outlets worldwide carried the story.

Miriam Hyman has been accepted as dead since July 7, 2005. As far as her father was concerned, at least initially, “the only other possibility, apart from a road accident, is if she was on the bus that was blown up.“

There were only five fatal incidents in London that day – no reported suicides, no road traffic accidents of the ‘person in collision with a road vehicle’ variety; nothing except the four bombs detonated on London Transport and an unspecified shooting at Canary Wharf, Miriam Hyman’s declared destination.

The first three events can be discounted on the grounds that Miriam was safely evacuated from King’s Cross after they had occurred.

That leaves only two feasible explanations for Miriam’s death that Thursday:

Either she died aboard a bus which, according to her own father’s account, she could not have caught, or she was shot at Canary Wharf.

There are no other possibilities.

And now we may begin to appreciate the true significance of Miriam’s telephone dialogue(s) that morning.

The first, at 9.45 a.m., compromises the idea that she may have boarded the no. 30 bus. Rachael Bletchly of the Mirror (4 July, 2015) remains convinced however:
“Ten years ago on Tuesday, the 31-year-old picture researcher rang dad John to say that she had been evacuated from King’s Cross tube station in London and not to worry as she would get a bus to work.”
Given her declared determination to get to work, there was no reason, in principle, why she should not have done so eventually, at least in time to meet a lunchtime appointment she is also understood to have made. Nevertheless, since she has been declared dead as of the Thursday morning we know she could not have arrived, either at her office desk or for lunch.

Not only must we ask ourselves how the Hymans might have known about their daughter’s second crucial ‘phone call that morning (which did not involve either of them), but we should also question what purpose it may have served as far as they were concerned, given Miriam’s earlier personal assurance that she was safe and well.

The key detail of the alleged conversation is that Miriam was advised not to continue on to work (at Canary Wharf). The Hymans (and anyone else) might then reasonably suppose, at least initially, that if she didn’t arrive at her office that day it was because she had been told not to bother.

(This state of affairs is a dark and subtle reflection of the McCanns’ various references to their daughter’s en passant remarks, whereby they manage indirectly to suggest that she was alive when she made them).

Nick Kollerstrom (author of Terror on the Tube) has researched the events of 7/7 in considerable depth and posted the following comment on an internet forum discussing the case:
“From King’s Cross, one gets to Canary Wharf by bus travelling Eastbound, by taking the 30 bus half way then changing. There is no way you would walk back to Euston, which is in the opposite direction, to get the no. 30 bus, which by the way left Euston station before she rang her Father at 09.45 – when she said she was at King’s Cross. So, one must agree with what the Father was quoted as saying, about his daughter’s fate. When I spoke to him (today, a second time) he denied having said this, and said he had been misreported.

“Speaking to her father, on the ‘phone, he confirmed that she had rung him at 09.45, however he denied that she had rung her place of work at ten o’clock. He is convinced she was dead by then.”
That makes three people (John, Mavis and Esther Hyman) all separately misreported by at least three different media outlets.

So what, exactly, has John Hyman retracted? His doubts about Miriam’s having boarded the no. 30 bus, obviously, as well as his daughter’s conversation with colleague(s) at Canary Wharf, about which he couldn’t have known in the first place – except he did. That was prior to his acceptance of the ‘official line’, which then made the office ‘phone call story (as an explanation for Miriam’s non-arrival at work) redundant. The bus bomb was ultimately considered to have taken care of that.

One cannot but feel sympathy for any truly grieving parent, and I have no wish to impugn the Hyman family. However, in the light of what appear to be something other than trivial contradictions on their part, together with the lack of any categorical confirmation by them of exactly what they knew and when they knew it, there are genuine grounds for suspecting their daughter Miriam did not fall victim to a bomb at Tavistock Square, but to a bullet at Canary Wharf, and that her 10.00 a.m. ‘phone call to work was a ‘storyline’, fed to the Hymans, so as to defer further inquiry until such time as a more appropriate location for their daughter’s demise could be decided upon. Either that, or (heaven forfend) it was a storyline constructed by the Hymans.


Nick Kollerstrom again:
‘On 10th July 2005 the Observer reported that “Police have put a tracking device on Miriam’s ‘phone so that if it is activated they will be able to find her.”‘
Whereabouts in relation to Miriam’s body was her ‘cell phone eventually found? It was clearly functional after the bombings that morning or the Police couldn’t have downloaded a tracker ‘app’ onto it; something there would scarcely have been any call for beforehand. The answer – it was never reported as having been found. That is not to say of course that it was never actually found.

Miriam’s mother Mavis is Indian, born in Kolkata. Miriam was therefore of mixed race (Jewish-Asian), and exhibited traits of each. Being an artist/picture editor, and based professionally at Canary Wharf, might she perhaps have been carrying a camera, a lap-top computer bag or portfolio case, and did these various characteristics conspire to appear suspicious when viewed through a telescopic gun-sight?

Answers to these several questions are provided by the Jewish Chronicle Online (29 April, 2010) in commenting upon the belated inquest into the many deaths, five years previously, on 7/7. Albeit lengthy, the following passage from the Jewish Chronicle is richly informative:
“The family of Miriam Hyman, who died in the 7/7 terror attack, was forced to wait four days to be officially told of her death, even though identification documents were found on her body.

“In the High Court this week, lawyers acting for the Hyman family and that of Israeli Anat Rosenberg, who was also killed by the Tavistock Square bus bomb in July 2005, urged the coroner to resume the inquests and investigate whether the security services failed to act upon information known about the bombers before the attack.

“The hearing heard that many families had suffered long delays in being informed of the deaths. One had to wait 11 days.

“Counsel Janine Sheff told the court that relatives of Ms Hyman, a 32-year-old picture researcher from Hampstead Garden Suburb, had to wait "four agonising days" to be told she was among the 52 victims.

“Ms Sheff said: "She was found with her bag strapped to her, with numerous documents with her ID on her."

“She added that the parents of Ms Hyman were unable to travel to London and search hospitals, instead relying on her friends, who were told the police had no information.

“Ms Sheff said: "So troubled were they from the lack of information from the police - who said they had to live with that lack of knowledge - that they sought a [bomb] survivor to help them understand what happened."

“Ms Hyman's mother, Mavis, said: "Those four days of no news were unquestionably the most horrendous of my life. Nobody had any suggestion as to what had happened. Her family and friends couldn't just sit still and we spoke to the media and survivors to try to get any information we could.

"The police were not helpful and gave us little information. We would have appreciated knowing about the identification found."

Note how "She was found with her bag strapped to her, with numerous documents with her ID on her."

Whether taken in or out of context, this is an altogether extraordinary turn of phrase, no doubt originating with the person(s) who actually ‘found’ Miriam in the first place.

Miriam is not described as having ‘a bag over her shoulder’ nor, however unlikely, ‘wearing a rucksack or back-pack.’ Instead her bag is ‘strapped to her’, conjuring up images elsewhere of an explosive waistcoat. To which we are invited to add ‘numerous documents with her ID.’ Well it was London, so I suppose even a pedestrian might be expected carry one or two means of identification – but numerous examples?

All we have to do here is bring forward the conventional wisdom of the day (that suicide bombers were wont to deposit evidence of their identity at the scene of their martydom, as Mohammed Sidique Khan is posthumously accused of having done at two locations on the London Underground, despite being credited with only one bomb) and we have the Blair government blueprint for a long-haired, dark-skinned terrorist.

And yet there was no mobile ‘phone, nor any information of immediate interest to the parents for four whole days?

Miriam may well have been found with ‘her bag strapped to her body,’ but where exactly was her body at the time?

It gets murkier.

Distortions in Space-Time

This from Esther Addley of the Guardian (6.5.2011):
“At around 9.45am one sunny morning in July 2005, John Hyman took a call from his daughter Miriam. There had been some sort of problem at King's Cross, she said, and she had been evacuated from the tube. She was fine, though, and he wasn't to worry. Her father suggested she find a coffee shop and wait until things calmed down.

“In the hours and days that followed the terrorist attacks on London, the Hyman family clung to that phone call like a lifebuoy, desperately telling themselves the call had come after 9.49am, the moment when 18-year-old Hasib Hussain blew himself up on the upper deck of a number 30 bus to Hackney.

“Four days later, after touring the capital's hospitals, putting up posters and making appeals via the media, they were at last told by a police family liaison officer that Miriam had been identified by her dental records. She had been sitting directly in front of Hussain at the moment of explosion, and was blown from the bus and on to the pavement, where she died very shortly afterwards.”
We ought here to interpolate another statement by Esther Hyman, again recorded within the Guardian video of the same date, which specifies even more precisely the location of Miriam’s corpse, an observation shortly to assume particular significance:

“She was thrown from the bus onto the pavement directly outside the entrance of the BMA building.”

Notice how this Guardian article allocates Miriam two additional minutes in which to catch the no. 30 bus, how the police somehow knew whose dental records to track down (presumably from the ID they were decidedly reluctant to reveal to the parents), and exactly where this lady was sitting in relation to other passengers on board the bus. (Reported at the inquest to have had an inboard seat, she is nevertheless catapulted onto the nearside pavement).

It doesn’t end there. The Guardian continues:
“The Hyman family made an even more striking discovery. They had been contacted, two years after the bombings, by Clive Featherstone, who had been working in Tavistock Square when the bomb went off, and who had held Miriam's hand in her final moments. "At first we didn't get back in touch with him … [But] since then we've become very close with him."

“It was only during the inquest process that they discovered the existence of another man, a passer-by called Richard Collins, who had gone to Miriam's side after Featherstone had been told to move along by a policeman. Initially they thought he must have been mistaken and confused Miriam with another victim, but no. "Richard told us afterwards: 'I would have felt a bit silly if it had turned out not to be Miriam, as I actually had her initials tattooed on my chest.' It's his only tattoo but it turned out that he had been so moved that he had this indelible mark put on himself. We find that exceptional."*
The Hymans thought at first that Richard Collins had been mistaken, yet he had sufficient confidence in his identification of their daughter as to have her initials tattooed on his chest afterwards. Thus confirmation of Miriam Hyman’s last moments becomes a pre-requisite for validation of Collins’ tattoo! We are not told the basis for Clive Featherstone’s identification of her.

Featherstone and Collins’ displayed their separate acts of sympathy toward the same young lady, whom counsel at the inquest would make every effort to identify as Miriam Hyman. There were however several dark-skinned female victims aboard the no. 30 bus, two of whom are known to have taken their last breaths at the roadside. Neetu Jain was 37 years old and originally from Delhi. Gladys Wundowa was black. Both are said to have been occupying nearside window seats.

In March 2006 Michelle Du-Feu, a doctor, described having treated a middle-aged Middle-Eastern or Asian-looking woman lying on the road at the rear of the bus. At the Inquest in January 2011 she said that when shown a photograph of Miriam Hyman a year earlier she had become confused, “because things obviously weren’t how I had remembered them.“

Despite attempts by lead counsel Hugo Keith to get Dr Du-Feu to admit she had treated Miriam Hyman, she did not do so. Ms. Gallagher, counsel for the Hyman family acknowledged that Dr. Du-Feu was thus “not so sure” to have treated and seen Miriam.

A Dr Michael David Peters, who was also invited to testify at the Inquest, said that when he came out from the BMA building he saw a torso:
“There was a sort of mass of sort of tissue, red, about one metre by a metre there. And then, on the other side, to the left as I was looking from the square in, there was a body of, I think, a black woman who was wearing a dress. The body seemed to be swollen, motionless, and I presumed she was dead.“ 
Although Hugo Keith once again tried to convince Dr. Peters that he may actually have seen Miriam Hyman, Peters insisted the woman he saw was black.

Hence two critically injured females were immediately attended in the road (or on the pavement), one of them Asian. Yet neither was identifiable as Miriam Hyman. According to ‘the Mirror’ (20.1.2011) Clive Featherstone described at the Inquest how Miriam “kind of moved to try and lift herself up or towards me” as he knelt beside her. However, the first thing Dr Peters noticed on exiting the BMA building was a torso. If this were Miriam’s body, which, according to her sister Esther, had landed in that very entrance, then she would have been killed instantaneously and there could have been no attempted movement whatsoever.

When asked about an earlier statement he had made concerning the absence of Miriam’s left leg, Richard Collins replied:
From the knee down, halfway across the knee down”. Loss of the lower half of one lower limb does not represent a ‘torso’.
Unless, therefore, an additional female body is known to have been lying in the immediate vicinity, then there are few grounds for believing Miriam was ever there, especially given the death also of Shahara Islam, another Asian female on board the no. 30 bus, positioned originally, it is supposed, among the group of seats directly across the aisle from the exploding bomb.

The eyes have it

Bearing in mind that Featherstone and Collins each claimed to have comforted the same individual, it is worth recording their respective observations regarding her facial appearance, especially as they were complete strangers to each other.

First Featherstone:
“I noticed that she had these little polystyrene balls in her eyes, which apparently later I heard was from the padding of the seats.”
And now Collins:
“Looking at my witness statement, I recalled that her eyes were green, if that is the case. So obviously, I was looking in her eyes, but I don't recall any polystyrene balls.”
Miriam Hyman’s eyes were unquestionably hazel brown, as one might expect of a lady of Asian extraction. Extraordinarily however, the eyes of 20 year old Shahara Islam, herself a victim from the rear of the upper deck, were considerably paler, and might easily have been taken for green. (See: HuffPo (Or below Ed)

Both Featherstone and Collins comforted the same badly injured, green-eyed lady, not an incomplete corpse. That lady was clearly not Miriam Hyman, and Richard Collins’ subsequent tattoo does not make it so. The inquest account of the state in which Miriam was found does not include mention of where, nor does it lead one to suppose that her body was other than intact, despite Esther Hyman’s announcement of her sister’s last known whereabouts in death, and what that would necessarily imply.

As further informs us:
“According to the Daily Star, inquests were opened on 13 July 2005 into the deaths of Miriam Hyman and others. No family members, however, were invited to attend the hearing which was held at St Pancras coroner’s court. It has not been explained why no family members were invited to attend. Dr. Reid then adjourned the inquests until after the end of police investigations.“
Miriam Hyman is said, conventionally almost, to have died aboard a no. 30 bus, in a misguided attempt to reach her place of work at Canary Wharf. Her name is after all included on a wall plaque placed in memory of the Tavistock Square victims. It is a bus she could not have caught, unless of course one subscribes to the Times Group account of 28 December 2005, which renders the father‘s contention false from start to finish:
“Miriam Hyman, 32, a freelance picture researcher was travelling to work, but was told by her agency not to bother coming in. Amid the chaos, she was evacuated from the Tube train she was travelling on at King's Cross. She walked to Tavistock Square, from where she rang her parents to let them know she was alright. She then alighted the doomed number 30 bus.”
John Hyman’s story is indeed questionable, especially the part where he describes a later ‘phone call he could have known nothing about unless informed of it by someone else. Miriam could have walked to Tavistock Square, where, according to the Times, she actually got off the ‘doomed no. 30’ bus, rather than on it.

Such verbal carelessness however hardly inspires confidence in the content of the report, or the belief that John Hyman’s own twice confirmed account was significantly incorrect.

That being the case there is only one place Miriam Hyman could have died that morning, and it would not have been as the result of any random act of terrorism.

Former Prime Minister Tony Blair has publicly lamented the deaths of British soldiers sent to fight in Iraq, as well as the many hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi men, women and children, who also perished as a direct result of the West’s unprovoked ‘War on Terror‘. It is tempting to speculate that his dogmatic refusal to authorize a public inquiry into the London bombings of 7/7 stemmed, at least in part, from his being unprepared to countenance the revelation of an innocent British citizen, a Londoner, being shot dead on the streets of their own capital, and by a member of their own security services. The state-sanctioned murder of Jean Charles de Menezes a fortnight later proved difficult enough to handle - and he wasn’t even British.

Dr Martin Roberts

Blair attends 7/7 memorial, full of contrition no doubt.

* Not as much as I find it unbelievable. Ed