Former McCann PI "Who is protecting Maddie's kidnapper?"

[John]

There is a plethora of internet opinion designed to throw any indication of Madeleine McCann's survival into disrepute.

Why should that be?

Quite obviously if Madeleine is a kidnap survivor there are those who have a vested interest in keeping it that way.

Certainly, in the absence of proof of Amaral's assertion of her death ... the proper course of action is to look for proof of life.

There are many walled and gated estates in Portugal where she could well be living her life in full sight.  As we know, the flaw in her eye is not unique to her and in a country where a great deal of effort has been expended to ensure the theory of her death is deeply embedded in the psyche ... who is going to remark on it anyway?

Oh come on Brietta, you don't really believe that do you?   A missing child whose image is known to most of the civilised world and she walks around anonymously?  Has just a little wishful thinking not entered the equation?

[ShiningInLuz]

Didn't Operation Grange show some interest in that road during their digging exercise?

Yes.

I am of the opinion that was in relation to Euclides Monteiro, as those two digs were adjacent to a water station and Sr. Monteiro worked in that line of business.  Further, there has been speculation of phone signals from his phone in the Luz area that night, which Sra Monteiro has dismissed by saying his phone had been lent out that evening.

Since we can't access such mobile phone calls it is impossible to have certainty on this.

I am of the opinion that Sra Monteiro may be being disingenuous with her explanation.  As far as I can tell, Sr Monteiro had a good reason to in Luz that evening and it has nothing whatsoever to do with Madeleine.  I think he might have been in a local watering hole conversing with friends.  If correct, those friends would give Sr Monteiro a rock-solid alibi.

The good reason/friends/watering hole idea is not one I can follow-up at the Luz end.  When we move to Portelas, I hope to talk to Sra Monteiro about this to see if I can verify some of the bits that are speculation.  That of course depends on whether Sra Montero is still in Portelas and whether she is willing to talk to me.

I have not yet researched Sr Monteiro so please treat this reply with caution.  NB It is also a much simplified version of the whole story.

[ShiningInLuz]

You don't know if it's changed
You still don't understand opinion and fact
Comprehension...zero

I can read.  It's not difficult.

[John]

Yes.

I am of the opinion that was in relation to Euclides Monteiro, as those two digs were adjacent to a water station and Sr. Monteiro worked in that line of business.  Further, there has been speculation of phone signals from his phone in the Luz area that night, which Sra Monteiro has dismissed by saying his phone had been lent out that evening.

Since we can't access such mobile phone calls it is impossible to have certainty on this.

I am of the opinion that Sra Monteiro may be being disingenuous with her explanation.  As far as I can tell, Sr Monteiro had a good reason to in Luz that evening and it has nothing whatsoever to do with Madeleine.  I think he might have been in a local watering hole conversing with friends.  If correct, those friends would give Sr Monteiro a rock-solid alibi.

The good reason/friends/watering hole idea is not one I can follow-up at the Luz end.  When we move to Portelas, I hope to talk to Sra Monteiro about this to see if I can verify some of the bits that are speculation.  That of course depends on whether Sra Montero is still in Portelas and whether she is willing to talk to me.

I have not yet researched Sr Monteiro so please treat this reply with caution.  NB It is also a much simplified version of the whole story.

Doesn't the Tanner sighting of a male Caucasian sort of rule out Monteiro or are we to accept Redwood's unverifiable and unproven claim that Tannerman may have been Crècheman?

[ShiningInLuz]

So in view of your claim that the McCanns are 'off limits'  - how do you think SY would deal with any evidence in the files which emerged during the investigation which clearly pointed a finger at the McCanns?   Would they ignore it on the grounds they have been told the  McCanns are 'off limits' ?     Surely not.

I can judge OG by its actions, which are more important than the words it issues.

Based on its actions nothing has emerged "which clearly pointed a finger at the McCanns".  This is hardly surprising, given that the remit puts them off-limits.

So what do you think OG would do if I sent them the methods by which the McCanns could have disposed of a body or could have concealed a body?  Would they put it into their 'to be investigated' pile, or would they look at the remit and stick it in 'the no further action' pile.

In the purely hypothetical situation where the MCanns concealed or disposed of a body, they have got away with it for 10 years and there is no reason to assume the MCanns, or any of the T7, are now going to break rans and produce the magic bullet you are hypothesising.  I don't do 'magic bullet' scenarios any more than I do massive conspiracy scenarios.

And that leaves us with the McCanns are off-limits and OG has not found anything on them because OG is not looking.

The because part is verifiable by what OG has not done - actions not words.

[ShiningInLuz]

So you now admit it could change
So the McCanns are simply not suspects

Do make up your mind whether the remit covers the review or the investigation.  A debate with someone who is twisting and turning faster than a twisty-turny thing is a waste of time.

The McCanns are not being investigated because the remit does not permit it - they are off-limits.

[Mr Gray]

I can judge OG by its actions, which are more important than the words it issues.

Based on its actions nothing has emerged "which clearly pointed a finger at the McCanns".  This is hardly surprising, given that the remit puts them off-limits.

So what do you think OG would do if I sent them the methods by which the McCanns could have disposed of a body or could have concealed a body?  Would they put it into their 'to be investigated' pile, or would they look at the remit and stick it in 'the no further action' pile.

In the purely hypothetical situation where the MCanns concealed or disposed of a body, they have got away with it for 10 years and there is no reason to assume the MCanns, or any of the T7, are now going to break rans and produce the magic bullet you are hypothesising.  I don't do 'magic bullet' scenarios any more than I do massive conspiracy scenarios.

And that leaves us with the McCanns are off-limits and OG has not found anything on them because OG is not looking.

The because part is verifiable by what OG has not done - actions not words.

The McCanns are not off limits apart from in your imagination
It is a totally ridiculously idea
Why should OG be interested in your ideas when there is no evidence the McCanns are involved and plenty of evidence they are not
You do not even understand that no inferences can be drawn from the cadaver alerts... you think your opinion is fact which shows you cannot assess evidence
Why should Grange be interested in anything you have to say

[Mr Gray]

Do make up your mind whether the remit covers the review or the investigation.  A debate with someone who is twisting and turning faster than a twisty-turny thing is a waste of time.

The McCanns are not being investigated because the remit does not permit it - they are off-limits.

I re read the remit today
It specifically says it is the remit of the review...fact
Your ideas are plain bonkers

[Brietta]

Oh come on Brietta, you don't really believe that do you?   A missing child whose image is known to most of the civilised world and she walks around anonymously?  Has just a little wishful thinking not entered the equation?

That's just it, John.  Madeleine McCann was coming up on four years when she vanished.  That was ten years ago.

English may not be her native language any more, she may not even understand it very well by now if she hasn't heard it spoken over that space of time.
Her skin may be darkened by the sun ... her hair colouring may have been changed also.

The only external feature which could not be changed is the iris of her eye ... and it is not unique to her.

Should Madeleine be alive today, the one thing we can be certain of is that she will no longer be recognisable as the little girl whose photograph became so familiar to us in 2007.  Age alone will have seen to that.

I firmly believe that Madeleine was alive and well when she was removed from the McCann apartment;  Dave Edgar and others have stated that it is usual for a predator to discard a child shortly after abduction, whether alive or if dead leaving the body to be found usually nearby.

There is therefore every possibility Madeleine may remain 'hidden' in the last place anyone would look for her ... and that is not too far from where she vanished.

[ShiningInLuz]

There is a plethora of internet opinion designed to throw any indication of Madeleine McCann's survival into disrepute.

Why should that be?

Quite obviously if Madeleine is a kidnap survivor there are those who have a vested interest in keeping it that way.

Certainly, in the absence of proof of Amaral's assertion of her death ... the proper course of action is to look for proof of life.

There are many walled and gated estates in Portugal where she could well be living her life in full sight.  As we know, the flaw in her eye is not unique to her and in a country where a great deal of effort has been expended to ensure the theory of her death is deeply embedded in the psyche ... who is going to remark on it anyway?

There are many walled and gated estates in Luz where Madeleine could be, but not in plain sight, rather in total secrecy.

One issue however is people who enter the plot regularly for a variety of reasons.  We have a pool cleaner, a gardener, a house cleaner, repair men, family and friends, the occasional GNR visit, the occasional bombeiros visit, delivery of gas cylinders, installation of electrical circuits etc. and nowhere to hide a child when these turn up.

Then there are Madeleine's needs - a doctor, a dentist, an optician, schooling, and her access to news sources such as TV and Internet.  I won't try to itemise the lot.

From these considerations and more, I am fairly confident, though not certain, that Madeleine is not being kept in the near vicinity.  There is just too much Madeleine-related activity around here to make that believable.

[Brietta]

Do make up your mind whether the remit covers the review or the investigation.  A debate with someone who is twisting and turning faster than a twisty-turny thing is a waste of time.

The McCanns are not being investigated because the remit does not permit it - they are off-limits.

In my opinion should evidence be found against an individual  whether Portuguese or British appropriate action would be taken.

Why would Kate and Gerry McCann or anyone else for that matter be considered 'off limits' by the Policia Judiciaria?

Evidence is what decides what is and what is not "off limits".

[Mr Gray]

I think it would be relatively easy to create a new identity for a child
A new passport and access to all services would be straightforward

[ShiningInLuz]

Doesn't the Tanner sighting of a male Caucasian sort of rule out Monteiro or are we to accept Redwood's unverifiable and unproven claim that Tannerman may have been Crècheman?

The last information to come out of SY was in Dec 2015, and stated that at that OG was still accepting information on both Tannerman and Smithman, which suggests they are not 100% certain re Tannerman.

The possibility exists that both Tannerman and Smithman are innocent.  Certainly, no information in the public domain matches Sr Monteiro to Tannerman or Smithman.  IF the digs east of Luz relates to him, THEN there must be something to make OG think that way.

However, my 'hypothesis' could be totally wrong.  It could be for example that OG decided from aerial photos that there were 'anomalies' there that needed to be investigated.

I tend to favour the phone calls theory because OG had to provide evidence to whoever approves such work that it was worthy of tying up PJ and GNR resources.

[Brietta]

There are many walled and gated estates in Luz where Madeleine could be, but not in plain sight, rather in total secrecy.

One issue however is people who enter the plot regularly for a variety of reasons.  We have a pool cleaner, a gardener, a house cleaner, repair men, family and friends, the occasional GNR visit, the occasional bombeiros visit, delivery of gas cylinders, installation of electrical circuits etc. and nowhere to hide a child when these turn up.

Then there are Madeleine's needs - a doctor, a dentist, an optician, schooling, and her access to news sources such as TV and Internet.  I won't try to itemise the lot.

From these considerations and more, I am fairly confident, though not certain, that Madeleine is not being kept in the near vicinity.  There is just too much Madeleine-related activity around here to make that believable.

Somewhere on the forum you have opined that the general opinion in Luz coincides with Amaral's theory.

A child whose only attribute shared with Madeleine is age ... not appearance or language ... is hardly going to be remarked upon by people who believe Madeleine McCann is dead.

[slartibartfast]

More opinion stated as fact

No that was opinion stated as opinion.