Summers & Swan - A new book - Looking For Madeleine

[Alfred R Jones]

I'm on chapter 6 so far and have yet to find any factual errors.  Perhaps the book's harsh critics on here could list for us all the factual inaccuracies they have found in it...?

[Mr Gray]

What has surprised me with the book is how direct and dismissive the authors have been to those high profile doubters, including amaral

[Alice Purjorick]

How has Summers suddenly become a one star author when most of his other books were rated manly 5 star...it's because the barmy army are on the march

The book on 9/11 did not receive a very good review in The Telegraph.
"The problem is that the authors haven’t done enough original research. Most glaringly, they seem to have interviewed no major figures in the Bush administration" If you delve deeper into the reviews you will find this a common criticism.
One review on the book on JFK which was considered his best work said  "Summers is an honest researcher who unfortunately is too easily bamboozled by suspect witnesses with "interesting" stories to tell".
That aside there are critical omissions in the latest book. It has however put a load of stuff under one roof which has maybe not been done before.
It is an interesting concept to describe the book as "definitive" and say "sensible people will only come come to the conclusion she was abducted" when the case remains under investigation and other options by NSY's admission are in the frame.

[stephen25000]

How has Summers suddenly become a one star author when most of his other books were rated manly 5 star...it's because the barmy army are on the march

The barmy army.......................

stop the myths,just another thought...., the purple place.

Yes the barmy army is well known.  %£&)**# %£&)**# %£&)**#

[John]

Been otherwise engaged over the last few days so haven't had a chance yet to peruse the recent posts on this thread so has anyone actually read the book and can comment on content?

[Mr Gray]

Been otherwise engaged over the last few days so haven't had a chance yet to peruse the recent posts on this thread so has anyone actually read the book and can comment on content?

I've read parts of the book and as I have said I am surprised how he directly criticises amaral, pat brown and quite a few others and is really supportive of the mccanns. He looks at the dog alerts and continually states "no evidential reliability" and explains how wrong amaral's conclusions re the DNA evidence were.

[John]

I've read parts of the book and as I have said I am surprised how he directly criticises amaral, pat brown and quite a few others and is really supportive of the mccanns. He looks at the dog alerts and continually states "no evidential reliability" and explains how wrong amaral's conclusions re the DNA evidence were.

Thanks Dave, I think we can all criticise those you mention and quite a few others too but where are these claimed new revelations?  A useful exercise would be to list everything new according to Summers and Swan.

[Mr Gray]

The book on 9/11 did not receive a very good review in The Telegraph.
"The problem is that the authors haven’t done enough original research. Most glaringly, they seem to have interviewed no major figures in the Bush administration" If you delve deeper into the reviews you will find this a common criticism.
One review on the book on JFK which was considered his best work said  "Summers is an honest researcher who unfortunately is too easily bamboozled by suspect witnesses with "interesting" stories to tell".
That aside there are critical omissions in the latest book. It has however put a load of stuff under one roof which has maybe not been done before.
It is an interesting concept to describe the book as "definitive" and say "sensible people will only come come to the conclusion she was abducted" when the case remains under investigation and other options by NSY's admission are in the frame.

“The best available general account of 9/11—soberly written, judiciously weighed, meticulously sourced.”—The Sunday Times

sunday times liked it

[Miss Taken Identity]

Meanwhile back to the plot.

The authors own notes on sources (see book)

They met once with the McCanns
They had one conversation with DCI Redwood who stated he would tell them nothing that was not in the MSM
No interviews took place between the authors and serving police officers in either country,
Principal sources were:
The PJ files.


Kate’s book
Amaral’s book
Collins’ book “Vanished”
BBC News
Sky News
Panorama
Crimewatch
MSM: Telegraph, Guardian, Sunday Times, Sun , Mirror & Express, Correio de Manha,Diario de Noticia,Journal de Noticias,Horas,Publico,Sol, Tal & Qual, Algarve Resident & Portugal News.

Oh stop the  Tittering missus...

Those who were interviewed included:
Jim Gamble
Brian Kennedy (double glazing magnate)
Carlos Anjos
Tony Bennett
Pat Brown
Bren Ryan
Ex Metodo3 chief Elisenda Vilena
Marcia Koenig & Andy Rebman (dog experts)
Various experts on Toxicology and use of chloroform.

Hahahahaha 'investigative journalists' 

Those who refused interviews included
Mark Harrison
Martin Grime
Chief Inspector Olegario de Sousa
John Lowe of FSS
Melissa Little (forensic artist with FSS)
Angela Morado pro-consul for the Algarve 
Goncalo Aamaral
Representatives of Mark Warner
Representatives of FCO

Now why would an 'investigative journalist' want to bother himself with all that 'investigative' work..
Hilarity in abundance - thanks Alice!

I must write  book about Little Madddie....I want the cash to go around the world and buy nice things!

[stephen25000]

“The best available general account of 9/11—soberly written, judiciously weighed, meticulously sourced.”—The Sunday Times

sunday times liked it

...and they found nothing that wasn't known before, and other than banking money from book sales, what will it achieve ?

A balanced investigation , and that includes an analysis of accidental death ???

NOPE.

[ferryman]

I'm on chapter 6 so far and have yet to find any factual errors.  Perhaps the book's harsh critics on here could list for us all the factual inaccuracies they have found in it...?

I have found one, a good deal further into the book than you have reached:

Page 152:

In his initial recommendations Harrison had suggested searching, not only accommodation used by the McCanns and their companions, but also, any hired vehicles.

Summers and Swan.

I dispute that. Harrison recommended that all vehicles owned or driven by Murat should be searched.


Also the places Madeleine, either definitely had been, or conceivably might have been, the Murat's place, the holiday apartments and areas in and around PdL.

Harrison does make an obscure reference to other places, but the way he words it bears close scrutiny.

In complying with these terms I undertook a series of briefings and site visits. These were with GNR and PJ personnel who had been involved in the previous searches conducted the week following Madeleine McCann’s disappearance in Praia da Luz.

The output of this process of reconnaissance and review was a written document entitled “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” (see appendix 2) and submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
It recommended considering re searching:

- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.

These recommendations were based on the fact that these areas had not been previously searched with the specific intent to locate Madeleine McCann’s concealed and deceased body and that the areas recommended afforded likely and obvious places to consider for concealment in such an investigation.

Harrison is, I think, clear that the recommendation for these searches was not his.

In the searches Harrison recommends, he is very precise. He states that all vehicles owned or driven by Murat should be inspected; also the holiday apartments and areas in and around PdL He doesn't mention the other vehicles or any of the other places until what I quote above, in his third and final report.

But it all looks spot-on otherwise ...

[Miss Taken Identity]

The Times liked it lol No, Someone who writes for the Times liked it. Everyone has an opinion.

Oh yes the Times  being sued ...I would be surprised if they dare to print anything not approved by Team Mc and their PR machine.

[stephen25000]

I have found one, a good deal further into the book than you have reached:

Page 152:

In his initial recommendations Harrison had suggested searching, not only accommodation used by the McCanns and their companions, but also, any hired vehicles.[/b]

Summers and Swan.

I dispute that. Harrison recommended that all vehicles owned or driven by Murat should be searched.


Also the places Madeleine, either definitely had been, or conceivably might have been, the Murat's place, the holiday apartments and areas in and around PdL.

Harrison does make an obscure reference to other places, but the way he words it bears close scrutiny.

In complying with these terms I undertook a series of briefings and site visits. These were with GNR and PJ personnel who had been involved in the previous searches conducted the week following Madeleine McCann’s disappearance in Praia da Luz.

The output of this process of reconnaissance and review was a written document entitled “Madeleine McCann Search Decision Support Document” (see appendix 2) and submitted to the PJ with copies supplied to Leicestershire Police and NPIA on 23-07-07.
It recommended considering re searching:

- All accommodation occupied by the McCann family and their friends as well as any hired vehicles.
- The villa and garden occupied by Robert Murat and any vehicles he had access to.
- Areas of wasteland adjacent to Murat’s and the McCann’s apartment.
- Areas of the beach in Praia da Luz.
- A portion of the coastline east of Praia da Luz.

These recommendations were based on the fact that these areas had not been previously searched with the specific intent to locate Madeleine McCann’s concealed and deceased body and that the areas recommended afforded likely and obvious places to consider for concealment in such an investigation.

Harrison is, I think, clear that the recommendation for these searches was not his.

In the searches Harrison recommends, he is very precise. He states that all vehicles owned or driven by Murat should be inspected; also the holiday apartments and areas in and around PdL He doesn't mention the other vehicles or any of the other places until what I quote above, in his third and final report.

But it all looks spot-on otherwise ...

and what have they found that is anything new or of relevance ?

Will this book solve the case ?

A simple YES or NO would suffice.

[stephen25000]

An Amazon reviewer............................

I'ts such a shame that the authors did not research the case before writing this book. There is a wealth of material on the McCann files and many other places on the internet that back up, without a shadow of a doubt, the theories of not just one but a whole team of Portuguese detectives, not to mention the British Police who helped to build this evidence. It seems that the book, which claims to be a true account, fails to mention the fact the many of the Private investigators employed by Brian Kennedy and the McCanns have since been imprisoned for activities outside the McCann investigation, but nevertheless were nothing other than fraudsters and crooks. Also missing is any mention of the evidence of two top British Cadaver dogs owned and trained by top dog handler Martin Grime. These dogs independently alerted to cadaver and blood in no less than 11 McCann related areas but nowhere else in Praia Da Luz. Other important documents such as the Gaspar statements and the report of Tavares de Almeida are also missing. ......................................... '

[faithlilly]

Where is your evidence that it is only supporters who view this book as a serious piece of investigative journalism?  Has it been poorly reviewed in the press?  Have any normal people (ie: not the bunch of rabid loonies who have left 1 star reviews on Amazon) claimed it is a seriously flawed book?

As far as I know no one in the press has reviewed it and the sales figures don't seem to be anything to write home about either.

But on the plus side Blacksmith has just chalked up a whopping 900 000 pageviews of his blog ! Well done Blacksmith