What happened to Madeleine McCann?

[EYES WIDE OPEN]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=xpTsMrU-nIk

[QUOTE]The Madeleine McCann disappearance has become one of the most enduring mysteries of our time and has generated thousands of front page headlines. Despite the unprecedented coverage, few people have detailed understanding of the evidence of the case. Mainstream media has been used to create diversion and confusion over what really happened, rather than inform their readers of the facts. We present the most detailed documentary yet produced about this case. Focusing on witness statements, physical and circumstantial evidence, media articles, police photographs and more leaving the viewer with a comprehensive understanding of the facts. Once the facts are laid bare, mainstream media are shown to be nothing more than a tool of propaganda in the hands of those trying to control the public's perception of reality for a range of nefarious purposes.

This is a stunning documentary using nothing but the quotes of the McCanns themselves. It does NOT put them in a good light AT ALL.

[Cardillac]

I confess I haven't accessed the provided video but I just feel the Madeleine McCann case is just one of countless repeats of the Jon Benet Ramsey case in Colorado; the parents know more than they've stated; ever seen photos of the McCann parents?- do they look "nice"?- no-

so why was this couple granted an audience with the POPE in the Vatican (knowing how shady the Vatican may be)?-

I can only hope this darling-looking little girl (with the very unusual physical tear-drop from her right iris according to photos) is still alive although I highly doubt it- evil-doers tend to eradicate 'darlings' first after they've initially abused them-

[Ahnung-quay]

At the least, Madeleine's parents should have been charged with negligence. Who leaves their small children alone to go out to eat? Not like they couldn't afford a baby sitter!

[boutreality]

Naturally, nothing to be said for certain. Though I do feel that occasionally select parents are approached to sell their children into bondage by the worshipers of death and deviance that control this planet. I definitely remember feeling that is what happened in the Bennet Ramsey case. These stories that make press are the ones that do not happen 'cleanly' likely just to stir up some media scare fodder.

The sit atop a system dependent upon 'collecting' and using our emotions against us.

[norman]

McCann's Embedded Confessions

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=slziMpXYjJo

Published on Nov 25, 2016
In November 2016 I travelled to the United States to meet and interview Peter Hyatt. Peter is a highly respected expert in statement analysis and in his work he teaches other professionals and assists law enforcement on criminal cases. When we speak, the process of constructing sentences in our mind involves deciding which tense to use, which words to select from our vocabulary and what order to put them in. This mental process all happens in a fraction of a second. If somebody is constructing sentences from their experiential memory, ie, recalling something real that actually happened to them, the process of word selection follows particular patterns and characteristics, which can be easily identified by a trained statement analyst. If however a person is fabricating and being untruthful when they speak, the natural cognitive process of choosing and ordering words is interrupted, because the mind must censor and insert artificial information in a very short time period. This means the language of somebody who is fabricating is characteristically different and can be picked up by a trained analyst like Peter Hyatt. He has analysed in depth an interview that Kate and Gerry McCann gave in 2011 and throughout the entire interview both Kate and Gerry it appears show signs of deception. Not only that, Peter determines from their language what he believes to be what it is they are concealing. The conclusions are shocking.

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=qyB29g6nbDo

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=VWWjkL-joS4

[Ewan]

Thanks Norman, I have not watched them yet (currently downloading) but am thanking you now in case I lose where I got them from.

I've looked at this case over the years and there is a LOT of very suspicious and dubious behaviours in many aspects, not least the big (political) guns that were brought in to assist in investigations.

[Enola]

Posted by Cardillac (here)
I confess I haven't accessed the provided video but I just feel the Madeleine McCann case is just one of countless repeats of the Jon Benet Ramsey case in Colorado; the parents know more than they've stated; ever seen photos of the McCann parents?- do they look "nice"?- no-

I remember her parents were very beautiful, but with a very guilty look about them. I used to think it was because they had been stupid enough to leave her alone. They seemed very remorseful.

[araucaria]

Posted by norman (here)
McCann's Embedded Confessions

Thank you norman for this video of the excellent Richard Hall interviewing Peter Hyatt. This is a hugely important contribution to a hugely important subject that extends way beyond the individual fate of poor little Madeleine McCann. I want to concur with and qualify (expand upon) Hyatt’s final remark to the effect that statement analysis requires serious training and is not to be diluted by incompetent efforts.

The above is of course true: statement analysis is a powerful tool in criminal investigation with, he says, a success rate of close on 100%. As he also says, amateur criminal investigators with a success rate even of 70% are doing an overall disservice by muddying the waters. What they can and should be doing is language analysis of a different kind. Language analysis is something we all do all the time as a crucial component of language communication, namely understanding what anyone is trying to say. Many people didn’t need Hyatt to have a gut feeling that the McCanns were not telling the whole truth, but only someone with his qualifications is in a position to tell them exactly why or ever get the McCanns sent to jail. The quality of our justice system depends on the high quality of its expert witnesses. However, most people most of the time know their place in society is not prosecution; they are simply seeking greater understanding of their everyday situations and to share that understanding; tolerance and restraint are required because mistakes will happen, and they must not be too costly.

I see it like a fractional distillation process. A refinery will distill at various different boiling points a range of products, all of which have their separate uses. Only very rarely can two serve the same purpose. For example, you can run a car on oil from a fish and chip shop, but I you wouldn’t dream of doing the opposite. The overall position is that we all need to be moving towards greater refinement in order to operate increasingly sophisticated machinery. I personally am highly trained in textual analysis, i.e. formal training extended by years of self-training through personal research. Textual analysis is an older technique similar to statement analysis, applied chiefly to literary texts, but on this forum I have been applying it to other material as well in the interest of furthering our understanding within the limits of my toolbox. When you study a character in a novel, you analyze his words and actions to work out who he is, which the character himself may not fully understand or wish to reveal, and which the author himself may not fully understand or wish to reveal. Since no one understands everything, there are grey areas everywhere, not necessarily guilty secrets, but guilt is one of the things that cloak themselves in secrecy. Others are misplaced guilty feelings, and entirely innocent feelings such as intimacy between a couple.

Take Proust’s novel In Search of Lost Time. The first time the character Swann makes love to Odette de Crécy, he makes advances by rearranging the cattleyas (flowers) on her corsage. He repeats this foreplay on several subsequent occasions, and eventually arranging the cattleyas becomes synonymous for them with lovemaking even when the practice itself is discontinued. This is a kind of euphemism of the sort we use in a range of situations to hide our embarrassment, prudery, the understatement of intimacy, or alternatively the shame of guilt. It is also a kind of idiolect, the term used by linguists to describe an individual’s idiosyncratic use of a language. This is not the stuff of novels only. Back in my student days, my girlfriend and I spent a weekend before some exams with another couple, who one afternoon went upstairs to their room, purportedly to revise De Saussure’s General Linguistics. When the bed began creaking, the name Saussure took on a whole new secret meaning for the two of us downstairs

Here is a real-life situation where it would be highly important to understand when people are using language in this way. Suppose a man regularly tells his wife he is popping out to the library. She may or may not notice the smell of alcohol on his breath when he gets back (from the pub next door to the library). Over time, she may or may not learn to distinguish between the fake husband fond of books and the real husband fond of booze. Or he could be coming home maybe smelling of perfume after spending time with another woman. The point is that ‘the library’ takes on a meaning totally different from the dictionary definition. The wife may or may not connive, or more or less consciously connive, in that lie; she may even make a joke of it. I remember, my mum always used to make the Sunday lunch for 1.30, telling my dad to be sure to be back by then. They both knew he would never be home before 1.45 and the lunch was never overcooked. They both worked to the unexpressed deadline, and my mum would have fun pretending to scold my dad and my dad would pretend to feel guilty. It was just their little game, but an outsider might have taken it at face value.

Peter Hyatt describes how such personal or intimate secrecy can spread to a larger number of individuals. When he explains the mention of the bathroom (toilet, cleaning teeth) as a veiled reference to sexual abuse (as the only place of brief respite), he is describing a case where this idiosyncratic use of language is shared, unknown to each other, by many people in the same situation. There is no need to postulate a conspiracy when victims are alluding to the same stressful circumstances appearing in different contexts. A conspiracy involves perpetrators using the same veiled references to similar abusive circumstances in different contexts: it is in fact a well-known feature of language we call slang or argot. In most cases, there is a very playful element to this colourful sublanguage, which is why it enters the language perfectly innocently; but that was originally mere cloaking for undercover references, say to diamonds (for a robbery) as ice, or words like snow or coke used to allude to illegal drugs in conversations that might be overheard by unwelcome eavesdroppers. This vocabulary actually enters the language as and when it is overheard and understood, which is why slang is so alive, always inventing new fun words or new meanings for existing words to replace slang that is no longer secret code. The point is that language generally also works in this manner: buzzwords and other neologisms no doubt have a particular origin soon forgotten as they rapidly circulate by word of mouth with no conspiracy involved – with the overall result that not everything that appears conspiratorial actually will be. The criminals will be simply mixing in the crowd and one step ahead of trouble.

The above can be applied to the point raised by TODD & NORA with reference to the use of the word ‘pizza’ (I note in passing that they too concur with Hyatt’s request for less amateur dabbling). Yes, most references to pizza will be innocent mentions of having a bite to eat; but, talking theoretically here, if the terminology exists, the likely origin of this choice of phrase will be a reference to one particular pizza restaurant; another protection of this code then being the existence of thousands of other pizza restaurants that have nothing to do with the issue. Hence there are two possible answers to TODD & NORA’s claim: the presumption of innocence may be due to a case of mistaken identity (the wrong restaurant), or it may be a case of the everyday naive reading of a criminal use of language to create endless alibis (going to a restaurant instead of to a brothel, when they are either, or both, depending on the user). This is turn may be totally innocent (as one would naturally expect from a forum member), or it may be setting up the next stage in the neologism race. If people are beginning to cotton on to ‘ice’ on the lips of diamond robbers, another synonym will be found and they may start talking about the polar icecaps to bring the word back into normal usage. Like fugitives making ever briefer stays in a succession of safe houses, a word like ‘pizza’ may by now have a very short shelf life from first being introduced to being withdrawn. Nonetheless, the previous safe house has been raided and evidence found. You still have the clue that people who were, if only for a time, extremely partial to one kind of fast food over all the others are ringing an alarm bell that needs further investigation. The problem with TODD & NORA’s claim then becomes the possible absence of further investigation by the competent authority – there is no such further investigation of the Clinton emails: some of them may indeed be Russian forgeries, but absent such serious investigation, it becomes a hollow election argument merely to state so while providing not a shred of evidence and preventing the FBI from verifying the claim.

Peter Hyatt’s evidence on the McCanns illustrates the dilemma here; he is certain of several things, but with reference to possible sexual abuse, he simply calls for further investigation, because, although clear in its existence, the evidence is ambiguous in its application. It is not clear whether Mrs McCann’s mention of toilet and teeth indicates abuse of her as a child, or abuse of her as an adult, or abuse of Madeleine, in the latter two cases presumably by Mr McCann. And regarding Madeleine’s disappearance, the evidence is also ambiguous from having multiple possible motives: the parents already have several reasons for hiding her accidental death: loss of their twins into care, loss of their reputations through negligence, loss of their livelihoods in medicine for possibly drugging Madeleine with medication, loss of their freedom in the case of a custodial sentence. Any one of these reasons would be sufficient to explain their deduced actions, and so the need to detect sexual abuse somehow fades into the background as being unnecessary and/or far-fetched.

Ambiguity is only one logical feature perceptible in the McCann story without formal training in statement analysis; others being tautology and contradiction. It goes without saying – hence it is tautology for the McCanns to say so – that an abduction requires a lapse of parental attendance. There is a contradiction in admitting to one kind of inadequate parental supervision (absence for dinner) to explain away another (an accident). And the ambiguity lies in the reversibility of the dinner story: it may after all be true, but unfortunately it is fully compatible with the construction of an alibi: they needed to have been absent in order to make an abduction even theoretically possible. As Hyatt points out, to sustain a lie, you need to introduce and divert attention to additional extraneous material. Abductions do happen from time to time, very unfortunately from a law-abiding standpoint, but it can be fortunate for someone looking for some kind of scapegoat. This is how lies and evil breed: the nastiness only gets worse. In this case no abductor has been found (further casting doubt on his existence), but one seems to have been invented, and often enough a culprit will be found who is maybe not innocent overall but totally innocent of that crime or non-crime. So a lesser offence of not preventing accidental death has escalated into another case of paedophilic abduction and likely unlawful killing which may well be a total fiction. In other words – and without prejudging this particular case – the existence of criminality ‘out there’, real or imagined, helps to get people off the hook. Meanwhile, on the level of investigation, which operates in reverse, working back from a crime scene to what happened to produce it, investigating the lesser offence might indeed escalate into a full-blown case of paedophilia much closer to home.

Without prejudging this particular case means: maybe not the McCanns, but very possibly Hillary Clinton (again: further investigation needed). For this is a situation that encapsulates what we are seeing with the Clintons on an altogether larger scale: if a politician has so much dirt coming out, the tendency is simply to vote her out of office and be done with it, because crime is exonerated by more crime; and more fake (non-existent) crime is piled up on real crime. Hence you get a gangster like Al Capone going to jail for tax fraud, and everything else he did never established before a court of law becomes the stuff of legend, in the growing limbo that we call ‘innocent until proven guilty’ and ends in a state of lawlessness whereby proof of guilt never happens and the world is run by fake innocents who also likely connive when falsely accused because it enhances their reputation.

Which brings me back to where I started. Hyatt is right to point out the pitfalls to seeking to raise the quality of our judicial system. It is there to coax people into taking responsibility for their actions at the earliest stage possible because the lies only multiply, crimes become more serious and criminality spreads from the hardcore criminals to society at large. The problems are systemic and we all need to do more to create an atmosphere of truthfulness (honesty) in which the lies cannot prosper.

[Jantje]

This is a very important update in the investigation of the disappearance of Madeleine McCann imo.
Richard Hall meets Peter Hyatt, who is an expert in statement analysis and take a look at the embedded confessions of the McCanns. reccomended for people that follow this ongoing investigation

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=slziMpXYjJo

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=qyB29g6nbDo

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=VWWjkL-joS4

[Shannon]

Very happy that mr Hyatt has gotten involved with hall. I've been a student of statement analysis for almost 10 years and when I discovered Peter hyatts blog way back i was very pleased with his need to place the importance of children's welfare above all else. He really does care about justice for the little ones who cannot defend themselves. This, to me, is like two worlds colliding. Lol. My PA world and my SA world.

Anyway, I've linked his site here before and always did so with the warning to take what is relevant to your questions or research, because Peter has strong beliefs that I just cannot get behind and do not support. That said he is a fair and thorough analyst who is very good at teaching and showing how he gets to the truth. It's a lot of work to learn SA, but the pay off is great.

Thanks for linking!

[norman]

There's a new thread just started for this latest statement analysis video in the Madeleine McCann saga, here:

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1116573

[regnak]

The interviews were great

I was informed amused and shocked how she died I always taught she was taken by unknown persons or person.
I have never looked at subject in any detail before .


Great post 10/10 bravo

[norman]

The McCann case is VERY complex. And very dangerous to explore, too. The UK government sent in the hardest hitters it had to cover up and distract and the whole nine yards.

There are even clues and rumors that something very odd was happening there at the resort that week.

Here's another twist to the story. There were some high-flyers in town that week:

https://projectavalon.net/forum4/show...=1#post1116612

[norman]

Maddie McCann O Mistério Gonçalo Amaral - CMTV April 23rd 2016

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=-FKsKD78Qsc

English Subtitles

[norman]

Listening to an early interview with Janet and Brian Kennedy, Kate McCanns’s aunt and uncle, a helpful priest was mentioned.

The name of the Anglican priest was David…. David? I didn’t remember a David. What I did recall was Father Pacheco, who gave the McCanns the keys to the Church of Nossa Senhora da Luz, most known as the PdL Church, and supposedly left a broken man, weighed down by the burden of Kate’s confession.

Then there was Haynes Hubbard and his wife, who arrived soon after Madeleine's disappearance, befriended the McCanns; to whom they returned the said keys.

I also remembered Paul Seddon, the Catholic priest who married the McCanns; an old golfing pal of Gerry. He was the priest Kate called on the night that Madeleine went missing. They spoke to him on the phone, according to an interview with The Tablet on June 16th, 2007.

It was in this interview the name of Father Pacheco is cleverly linked with Seddon’s name. They talked of him saying the rosary with them a later date; then, the article adds “The Parish Priest also gave the McCanns the keys to the Church so that they could pray there alone in the evenings.”

You see, it doesn’t say it was Father Pacheco, but it certainly implies it was to any reader. Father Pacheco’s statement of Oct 30th. 2007. gives a mixed message: “He (Father Pacheco) gave them the key to the church on the 7th or 8th of May, on the suggestion of John Geraghty, a resident of the parish, so that they could go calmly to church without any pressure. Someone from the Church gave the key to John Geraghty, who then passed it onto the McCanns with Father Pacheco’s permission.”

He does not remember the date upon which the key was returned. However, Father Pacheco later denied that he had made any decision to hand the keys to the McCanns. In an article dated Dec 13th, 2007, by Cecilia Pires, for The Algarve Resident, she writes: “Father Pacheco ensures that “Priest have no power to order anything in our churches. We have an entity for that, which is the Conselho Pastoral, where the catholic community is represented…………….With regards to the key to the Praia da Luz Church that the McCanns were given after Madeleine went missing…..”That was a decision made by the Conselho Pastoral and I only knew about it three days later "”

How many people were members of the Conselho Pastoral and how many were required to make this decision? Could it be that only one person made this decision?

David seems to have been airbrushed from history, often a sign that something interesting lurks.

The Reverend David W Heal was the priest at St Vincent’s; the Anglican name of the same church which was shared with the Catholic congregation.

According to reports in Correio da Manhã, Sep 19th, 2009: “The keys to the Church , which members of the parish decided to lend to the couple a few days after Madeleine’s disappearance…. were returned to the Anglican priest…who befriended the couple". However, Hubbard‘s comment on the returning of the keys was ambiguous “I agree that the parish decided to lend them the church keys” . He didn’t reveal it was to him that the couple returned the keys.”

The McCanns were reported to have handed the keys over without saying goodbye to Father Pacheco, so it certainly wasn’t him they were returned to. Even so, Father Pacheco seems to have been severely chastised by his superiors.

He denied taking confessions from the McCanns in his statement, so perhaps he left feeling used and abused. It’s hard to believe any burden he may have carried came from the unlikely event of confessions, but there may have been other reasons.

From what I know of the Catholic Faith, I’m certain that Kate would not have confessed to Father Pacheco. He would have told her that she could not be forgiven unless she confessed what had happened to the authorities.

Confession would have brought risk, not forgiveness. A few Hail Mary’s or a decade on the rosary would not be enough!

Unless she wanted to compromise him.

Russell O’Brian, in his rogatory interview, refers to David Priest -a comma between the words is required- and explains why David’s number, beginning 914, is on his mobile phone, immediately after that of Robert Murat.

It seems David, therefore, was the most likely person to have sought the agreement of the Conselho Pastoral. Was it also not more likely that the keys had passed between Geraghty and Heal? Fiona Payne and Rachael Mampilly/Oldfield comment on the perceived strangeness of Kate’s desperate need to speak to a priest in the midst of this maelstrom and seek to explain it in a vague manner.

It seems that concerns were expressed that the McCanns had called the media and a priest before they contacted the police. El Pais in Dec 07 “For the police, the most surprising thing was that the first concern of the parents was to alert the press before the police themselves. They were also struck by the fact that Kate asked the Ocean Club reception for the village priest’s telephone number.”

Why would they do that?

The following article in First Magazine (with thanks to Pamalan’s site) throws a very interesting spotlight on the involvement of David Heal: “With every squeeze of her daughter’s Cuddle Cat, anguished mother Kate McCann willed her little daughter home. Priest’s wife, Pam Heal helped Kate and Gerry through the early, terrifying hours of Madeleine’s disappearance…. “Someone’s taken Madeleine, someone’s taken Madeleine” she wailed over and over again, said Pam. Kate kept playing with the toy. She said Madeleine had definitely been taken from them because she would never go anywhere without her favourite toy. The night Madeleine disappeared, Kate and Gerry telephoned the local Anglican priest, Father David Heal, asking him to visit them at their apartment…..When he arrived with his wife, 38 year old Kate threw herself into the priest’s arms as she broke down. It took him 3 hours to comfort Kate.”

There are no statements from the Heals in the available PJ files, in spite of their KEY roles in the early hours of Madeleine’s disappearance.

References to the Heals’ involvement refer to the McCanns contacting them on Friday. The Mail, on Sunday reports “Reverend Heal was called to meet the McCann family on Friday.”

Well, that would be partly true, if the Heals had arrived around 10 p.m. and had remained at the apartment for 3 hours. None of the T9 mentions the Heals’ visit in their interviews and they quickly disappear from the media radar.

Father Heal did continue to conduct services at St Vincent’s, although one report suggests that he may have been leaving the next day.

During a service held later in the week Father Heal’s sermon included the following observations “Whatever happens today, whatever happens tomorrow, whatever happens in the days ahead, after this week, life will never be the same again……. We have all been changed and we have all been changed forever.” (Mail on Sunday)

Thanks to The Maddie Case File for newspaper archives. References refer to key and keys. I don’t know if there was more than one.



https://textusa.blogspot.co.uk/2010/...y-trinity.html

[regnak]

Complex yes I now unsure who killed her was it her parents in a accident that she was alone in apartment when or
If she was taken and why would a kidnapper or rapist or ? Take only One child instead of 3 has always seemed strange

The interviews above were great though but to be fair you also give reasonable suspects so I'm on the fence you need some better informed than me to decide

[Jantje]

I'm not buying the whole abduction story. I think she died in the apartment.

[Matthew]

In light of this update here is a report linking Sir Clement Freud to the McCann case published 15 June 2016 by The Telegraph. What ever the McCanns involvement Freuds involvement links back to the establishment.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016...-urged-to-pro/

POST UPDATE
Text from the link:

Sir Clement Freud exposed as a paedophile as police urged to probe Madeleine McCann links

Sir Clement Freud, the former broadcaster and politician, was exposed on Tuesday night as a paedophile who sexually abused girls as young as 10 for decades.

Freud, who died in 2009, spent years abusing a girl who he brought up as a daughter, and violently raped a teenager while he was an MP.

...

Detectives investigating the disappearance of Madeleine McCann have been alerted to the fact that Freud had a villa in Praia da Luz, Portugal, the resort where the three-year-old went missing in 2007.

He befriended the McCanns in the weeks after their daughter went missing, entertaining them at his house on two occasions and keeping in contact by phone and email.

...

[Sunny-side-up]

Thank for posting these vids, will watch through them when feeling strong enough.

One thing I vaguely remember early in this Tragedy/fiasco was something Mrs McCann said

“oh my god they've got her” or "they got her, they got her" (words like that) ?

That struck me in the face as meaning, they knew that someone was after her and or knew who had here, as if they had already tried to tell someone NO.

I did hear that in an early statement but only once?

[Cardillac]

@Jantje

"'m not buying the whole abduction story. I think she died in the apartment"

well, any ideas HOW she died in the appt.?-

please give us your viewpoint; so IF she died in the appt., HOW?

please explain and give us your reasoning processes behind this-

I came to the conclusion a long time ago: the more preposterous, outlandish, crazy, horrific a a concept initially appears to be the more truth there probably is behind it;

welcome to the real world-

be well all-

Larry