'Madeleine Was Here' - The Documentary *

'Madeleine Was Here' - The Transcript, 12 May 2009

'Madeleine Was Here' - The Transcript

12 May 2009

With thanks to 'Mitts' for transcript

K: I did my check about 10.00 'clock and went in through the sliding patio doors and I just stood, actually and I thought, oh, all quiet, and to be honest, I might have been tempted to turn round then, but I just noticed that the door, the bedroom door where the three children were sleeping, was open much further than we’d left it. I went to close it to about here and then as I got to here, it suddenly slammed and then as I opened it, it was then that I just thought, I’ll just look at the children and I could see Sean and Amelie in the cot and then I was looking at Madeleine’s bed which was here and it was dark and I was looking and I was thinking, is that Madeleine or is that the bedding. and I couldn’t quite make her out. It sounds really stupid now, but at the time, I was thinking I didn’t want to put the light on cos I didn’t wanna wake them and literally, as I went back in, the curtains of the bedroom which were drawn,… were closed, … whoosh … It was like a gust of wind, kinda, just blew them open and cuddle cat was still there and her pink blanket was still there and then I knew straight away that she had, er, been taken, you know.

Voice over: It’s now 2 years since Madeleine McCann was abducted while on holiday in Portugal. Her parents, Kate and Gerry live near Leicester with Madeleine’s brother and sister, four year old twins, Sean and Amelie.

G: We are a family, and we’re a happy family, but we are not a complete family.

KM: I think we’re far from normality. We’re far from normality but we’re closer than we were.

K is painting the names of the three children.

She asks the children what is the name of their sister. One of the children says the full name and the other child says the shortened version.

K: I honestly believe they’re expecting her to come home, you know, one day soon. They are very much, well, when Madeleine comes back, we’ll share our toys and, you know, Amelie is wearing Madeleine’s shoes. She’ll say well these shoes won’t fit Madeleine, now, so we’ll have to take her and get her a bigger pair of shoes when she gets home. You know.

Voice over: K has given up her work as a GP and now stays at home with the twins.

K: A lot of the places that I go now ,I used to go with Madeleine as well, so there’s little things that trigger, (mumble) like on the farm where we go quite a lot. You know, I can see Madeleine swinging on the rope in the hayloft. She was great, she was only three and she’d be like, you know, swinging backwards and forwards, you know. I can see her in the little, sort of, gypsy wagon that they had, asking me to come in and that’s hard. You get memories and reality hits in again.

It’s like kinda, of, um, tangible void, really.

Voice over: Gerry has returned to work at Glenfield Hospital, where he is a consultant cardiologist.

G: Given the indefinite nature of what we are going through, you have to, at some point, say, I’m going to go back.

Voice of Interviewer: Do you think you have both healed a bit.

G: Healed is a diffi…adapted, I think, is probably the right word. There’s still, there’s a scar, a deep, deep scar there, that’s, kinda, knitted at the minute but you still think it might break or come loose and stitches (mumble) But, it is, er, definitely an er… adaptation. I think.

G: There’ll always be a hope, you know, we’re living with this carrot, that potentially she could come back and I think, that makes it more painful, that you don’t know and that she’s, she’s, she’s out there and separated from you It’s less raw, erm, less painful on a day to day basis, erm, but, it’s still pretty painful. (Sighs) Erm, it’s different.

Voice over: The second anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance is approaching. Kate and Gerry want to use the media attention to keep the search in the public’s mind.

K: (in their study). It almost feels like the last, I guess, media opportunity. We really need to think about that, to get the right message out.

Voice over: (very briefly, showing part of fm (download poster page ). The McCanns are organising a series of events aimed at prompting fresh evidence, including a difficult trip back to the holiday resort.

Voice over continues: A national TV appearance in the States and perhaps, most crucially a visit to the world’s leading child recovery expert. (shows E A). EA says we truly believe (shows the picture) this is what Madeleine McCann looks like today. Shows new image.

G: She’s either out there or she’s not and there’s nothing to say that she’s not out there alive. So it’s simple, she’s out there until proven otherwise.

Voice of Interviewer: Who actually is looking for Madeleine at the moment?

G: Er, hopefully, lots of people, er, in the general population, but in terms of an investigative strategy, then there’s no law enforcement agency that is proactively doing anything. It’s pretty amazing really. Er, when you think about, it’s a very serious crime and, erm, we’ve got to do it.

G: We’re not out making a fuss for the sake of it or to say, things were done badly or could have been done better. That’s not what we’re interested in. We’re not interested in looking back. What we want to do is look forward.

Voice over: But there are two men still looking for Madeleine, ex-Detective Inspector DE is the senior Investigating Officer. He works alongside former Detective Sargeant A C. Both are now employed by the fm fund.

AC: …given a really good description and what I’ve done is, I’ve made arrangements to go and see him on Tuesday morning.

DE: I’ve inherited an investigation which is 18 months’ old. It’s a massive investigation.

AC: For me, it’s quite simple, whether it be a high profile murder or any investigation. It’s a jigsaw puzzle and it’s just the case of putting little pieces in and that’s what we’re doing. You start at the beginning, you do the basics right and everything else comes together. and that’s what, we, hopefully, we’ve done.

DE: One of the hypothesis would be, that it’s the parents that have done it, and it goes without saying, that’s looked at and I’m sure K&G understand that. If, we had any evidence that K&G were involved, we would hand it over to the authorities.

Voice of Interviewer:: and did you find anything?

DE: No, nothing, not a shred of evidence that they were involved.

AC: When I had the interview for the job, I made it quite clear that I would only take the job, if it was an independent investigation and if there’s evidence against anybody, no matter who it is, that we give that evidence to the police.

Voice of interviewer: Do you work with different theories about what happened? Can you say what you think happened?

DE: Well, the abduction theory is the main one that we’re focusing on. If a stranger kills a child or anyone for that matter, they almost, almost always dump the body within a very close proximity of the crime scene. Now this particular area around PdL has been systematically searched. The search was started on the night and continued for weeks and weeks and no body’s been found, so that gives me hope.

Voice of Interviewer: What about if it was dumped in the sea? I mean that’s what most ….

DE: That’s always possible of course. But, again, the sea quite often, you know, gives up the bodies. But no bodies have been found. So, I think that abduction is the most likely motive. Most likely done by an individual on their own. Most likely, an individual who has close links with PdL, which is why we focused all our efforts really, or most of our efforts, certainly on PdL.

Voice over: Out of the hundreds of witnesses who came forward, only a handful are from the local Portuguese community. These are the people the investigators want to hear from so they plan to return to PdL and reconstruct key events surrounding Madeleine’s disappearance. Hoping to provoke a response.

K: They used to come and just sit and get a haircut. (laughs). Seems hard to believe it’s actually busier now then it was a year ago.

Voice of Interviewer:: Has the balance changed, because you’re not working in paid work. You’ve worked for most of your adult life.

K: Women adore cooking and washing, anyway don’t they? (laughs)

Voice of Interviewer: So, yes, that hasn’t changed?

K: I don’t think so. It’s funny, cos, you know, going back a few years, if I hadn’t been in paid work, I’d have probably felt, a bit guilty. But, now, what I’m doing is the most important job that I’ll every have to do and I think my work is incredibly valuable.

Voice over: When the Portuguese police shelved the case last summer, they released 30,000 case files, K has spent the last six months going through every document.

K: The vast bulk of it was in Portuguese. So, we then, had to get it all translated, which probably cost us about £100,000. I don’t believe anybody’s got the motivation that I have and I was desperate to go through this myself, because I knew that I’d be going through it with a fine toothcomb and I have spent months and months and months and months going through it, evenings, weekends. You know, you wanna go through it really, really quickly because I wanted to get all the information I can and know what I can do, to help find her, as quickly as possible. So, obviously, I just worked really hard, just to get through it. Often, you know, police do say the name’s in the files. It was always there, but you just need other bits of information, really, to come in to basically highlight the name. At the moment, there isn’t a big arrow and an astrix (sic) by the name.

Voice over: The most likely sighting of Madeleine and her abductor was by JT, a friend of the Mc’s. In the files, K believes another witness statement from an Irish family, describes a very similar sighting to JT’s. Less than a mile from the Mc’s apartment.

K: The reason why this is significant is, both sightings were given independently. So, when this family gave their statement they weren’t aware of J(T)’s description and there’s actually quite a lot of similarities and it does beg the question, I mean, how many people carry their children on a cold night, not covered, you know. Nothing on their arms, or their feet, no blanket. Now, either there’s been two people carrying children that way, who haven’t come forward to eliminate themselves or potentially they’re related.

Voice of Interviewer: But, you think that child is Madeleine?

K: I think it’s a good chance it could be Madeleine. Certainly, the description there, sounds to me, like Madeleine.

Voice over: K and the fm campaign co-ordinator travel to the search team’s offices. They want to discuss the details of the upcoming reconstructions and three potentially key witness statements, that all tell of a man hanging around the Mc’s apartment in the days leading up to May 3 2007.

DE: The most important one, apart, obviously, from Jane, is sighting No. 3, the man in the alleyway at the back of the apartment. No.3 is definitely a very important sighting cos it links them.

Voice over: The investigators have examined the statements from the three different witnesses and are now convinced that prior to Madeleine’s abduction, the Mc’s were being watched. The team hope this new information will give them the breakthrough they need.

DE: You’d think, it’s gotta be the same person, wouldn’t you, really?

AC: and all three say he was watching the apartment.

DE: We’re here to discuss the pending reconstruction that we want done.

K: So, basically, it looks like we’ve got five sightings, really. Two, a man with a child and three, just a suspicious individual.

DE: Yeah

K: and three, the three with the suspicious, suspicious, of the suspicious (she seems to have developed a stutter) individual, kinda, tie in together.

DE: They all tie in together.

Fm campaign co-ordinator: They’re all at similar times and place.

DE: There’s three in exactly the same location. I don’t know what the Portuguese authorities have done to actually eliminate these people from the enquiry. So, we’ve gotta presume that they haven’t done it and go with that. So, it’s just important, that we actually, we are accurate in what we know and make sure that that’s what we’re going with. No speculation. It’s gotta be the facts that we know and not try to fill in the gaps that we don’t know.

K: I mean, I’d like to go back, but not for this, to be honest. It’s kinda, just below the surface and I just, you know, I’d be scared, I think, you know, to sort of open it open it up again, really, so. yeah. I think, it’s actually going through the scenario of that night, as well, you know. Erm, I mean, you know, even what I can remember of the night, you know. Seeing G, erm, that distraught, really, sobbing and on the floor. I mean, I suppose I’m concerned that that will, er, surface again.

Voice over: K calls key witness JT, who has agreed to join G and the investigators in PdL for the reconstructions.

Scene: K talking on the phone to JT

K: “Oh, ok, pretty busy, (she laughs). Although, it’s quite good to be honest to be doing stuff and focused and it just sort of helps, you know, to be doing something positive thing. How you feeling about the weekend? I mean, I’m really nervous and I’m not going (laughs). Thank you very much by the way. No, I know, I know it’s a big step, but we appreciate it anyway so, thank you.

K: Er, she’s trying not to think about it. She just said, erm, apart from the obvious emotional concern, she’s worried about the reaction of people locally.

Voice over: Returning will be controversial. PdL was a popular family holiday resort, but things haven’t been the same since Madeleine’s abduction.

K: You know, we are aware that, unfortunately, erm, this has all been a headache really for people whose businesses are out there, their livelihoods, you know. It’s a negative, a child’s been abducted from that area and I guess in the ideal world, it would all go away, you know, everybody could move on with their lives and, but, you know, our little girl is still missing so …

K: I think regardless of what anybody thinks of me and G, and I’m a bit past caring now, really. But, you know, I think, people do feel for Madeleine and that’s the most important thing and they want Madeleine to be found and they want Madeleine to be well. There has been a question as to why now and I’d simply say, well Madeleine is still missing. Why not, now? You know.

Voice of Interviewer: Do you feel there’s a lot riding on this weekend?

K: I do, yeah, and I’m nervous. I’m nervous because I realise how important this is to do really. To get that bit of key information, I’m nervous that it’ll … all could get sabotaged or it could all go very wrong. Obviously, I don’t want that because it’s so important.

G: We are desperate for this to be successful and to be done and hopefully it might be one call, t might be 10 calls, but that’s all it’ll take, it could be just one piece of information.

DE: The offence was committed in PdL, that’s a simple fact. So, you don’t start an investigation in, er, Morocco or Spain or even Lisbon. This event’s happened in PdL. It’s a very self-contained resort and that’s where I think the answer is.

Voice over: D E is leading the search for Madeleine McCann. Today, he’s in PdL, on the Portuguese Algarve, to oversee filming of significant events described in witness statements. Statements, which he believes, strongly suggest that someone was watching the Mc family. He hopes that the reconstructions will lead to the discovering who that someone is.

DE: He may even have been watching the apartment for a week or more. I don’t think it was someone random. In my experience random just doesn’t happen. Someone just doesn’t go in, … passerby, and pick up a child and take it. These things are planned.

DE with Pimpleman actor

DE: This, erm, scene. You’re standing over there and you’re standing at an angle

Action: filming starts

Witness 1: Child and woman walking.

Voice over: Witness No. 1 is a British tourist. She first saw something strange four days before Madeleine disappeared.

Sunday, April 29, approx 08.00

Witness 1: I was walking along the road with my daughter, when I saw a man. I grabbed my daughter’s hand and pulled her towards me because for some reason, he unnerved me.

Voice over: She saw the same man again. This time close to the Mc’s apartment on the day before Madeleine went missing

Wednesday 2 May approx 15.00

Witness 1: The next time I saw him, he was standing on the opposite side of the road to the apartment. He appeared to be watching it. He was about 5’10”, slim build and wearing casual clothes, jeans, I think. I would describe him as very ugly, pitted skin, with a large nose.

DE talking to a young girl (Witness 3)

DE: …and as you’re just passing here, this chap will be stood over there. So, if you just, you come up, if you just glance over at him and ….

Scene shows Witness 2, Mum, girl and two dogs

Voice over: The second witness is a school girl, who lives near the holiday complex. Three days before Madeleine was taken, she was with her mum outside the Madeleine’s apartment.

Monday 30 April approx 08.15

Witness 2: I was walking to the school bus stop. I go this way to school every day. As I was walking down the road, near the apartment, I saw a man on the small path behind the block. My grandparents used to live in that apartment. So, I always look at it, as I pass by. The man seemed to be looking at the balcony of the ground floor apartment. He was wearing a black jacket and leaning against the wall.

Voice over: She saw him again, as well, the day before Madeleine was taken.

Witness 2: I didn’t go to school that day because I had an ear infection. I was walking up the road with my two dogs, when I saw the man. He was standing on the road opposite the OC and he was staring at the apartment.

DE talking to older couple (Witness 3)

DE: You have him coming from your apartment, which is over here, somewhere. You turn the corner and walk down the path.

Lady witness (the couple) (Witness 3): What the two of us?

DE: Yes, the two of you together.

DE: This was actually a sketch that was drawn by the witness at the time and, er, as you can see, he’s just stood where we are now. (shows sketch the couple) Make eye contact with him and just walk straight on past.

Voice over: Witness No 3 is a man with his partner from Cheshire. He gave a statement to the police describing a man he’d seen near the apartment.

Witness 3 (Man) I can’t remember whether I saw the man on Wednesday 2 or Thursday 3 May (approximately 11.30). But as we walked along the road, I saw a man standing next to the wall by the parking area. On the opposite side of the road was a white van. I paid particular attention to him, because he appeared to be focused on watching the apartment block as I walked past him, I looked at him, and for a split second, we had eye contact but then he just carried on staring at the apartment.

DE: We’re asking for people to come forward with information. For me, one of the big things in any major crime, the perpetrators always confide in someone else. They’ve gotta get it off their chest and it’s that person, as much as anything, that we’re aiming at. Someone knows something.

Voice over: G is back in PdL. His arrival and the reconstructions are attracting a lot of media attention. But for the people who live here, it’s attention they can do without.

G: This is an area that relies strongly on tourism and people’s livelihoods have been affected and I can totally understand when people are suffering economically, that they get resentful. But, hope they can understand as well, that as parents, we need to find Madeleine.

Voice over: The simmering anger is evident. A brand new billboard poster of Madeleine with “Help me” in Portuguese has been splattered with paint and at the holiday complex G can hear the hostility (heckling)

G: No one, even with a heart of stone, can take away that there’s a little girl missing. Why anyone would not want to help find her is a mystery and obviously if we find Madeleine, then everyone can move on.

Voice over: He goes back to the Tapas Bar where they ate in the evenings, while the children slept in the apartment.

G: I can’t remember exactly where the table was. It was kinda in this bit, so it’d be about around here and I was kinda sitting in this bit and K was here. Well, you could see where the shutters are now and the bit of the hedge, it’s grown. It was cut, you know, a couple of feet lower than that.

Voice over: For the first time in two years, G returns to apartment 5a of the OC.

Voice over: The last place where he saw his daughter, Madeleine, asleep in her bed.

G: So, I actually came in and Madeleine was just at the top of the bed here, where I'd left her lying and the covers were folded down and she had her cuddle cat and blanket, were just by her head It’s terrible because, I , erm, had one of those really proud father moments, where I just thought, you know. I just thought, your absolutely beautiful and I love you and I just paused for a minute and then, I just pulled the door closed again and just to about there and, er, I felt incredibly proud standing there and having, you know, 3 beautiful children.

That’s the, I think the most ironic thing of the lot, that, that momentary pause I had, at that door, that’s exactly what I felt like. You know, a few minutes before our world was essentially shattered and probably, 3 or 4 minutes before Madeleine was taken and we obviously, absolutely, er, what’s the word, persecuted ourselves for not being here and, erm, there is no doubt, that not being here at that moment, erm, increased the risk of it.

Voice over: The Mc’s were on holiday with a group of friends. In the evenings, they all ate together and took it in turns to make half-hourly checks on each other’s children. Two of the group, MO and JT, both crucial witnesses, have returned to help DE with the reconstructions. It’s believed that Madeleine was taken shortly after her father’s check at 9 o’clock. In the 45 minutes that followed, there were two significant sightings of a man carrying a young girl. The first was by JT. She was looking in on her sick daughter, when she saw G returning from his check. He was talking to a friend, JW, at the side of the road. However, J(T) and G remember the scene differently.

JT: So, I think you were about here. Cos, I think that you were standing like that and, J(W) was there, with his pram, pointing down that way. Cos, I think if you’d been looking at me, I would’ve said something, cos I would’ve said about, cos K had been moaning that you’d been gone a long time watching the football.

G: I’m almost certain that when I came out, I came over and he was here and I was like that. That’s my memory of it, it’s like J(W) is 6’3” or something and looking up and then turning in, when I finished. That’s my memory of it.

JT: Yeah. I mean, well we just …….

DE: It’s like I said, there are, you know, inconsistencies, you know, in every major investigation.

JT: Ok, that’s fine.

DE: Obviously, the most important thing is what you saw, Jane. It’s not where G and J(W) were actually stood. Because they didn’t obstruct your view of the man. So ….

JT: I was walking up here to do the check and probably, as I got to , it’s hard to know exactly where, but probably, about here, I saw the man walk across the road there, carrying the child. I just got up and walked out the Tapas bar, past G talking to J(W). That’s when I saw somebody walk across the top of the road, carrying a child and I think, I did think, oh, there’s somebody taking their child home to bed. But, they didn’t look like a standard tourist. This is ridiculous isn’t it? It just looks so much like somebody abducting a little girl, when you look at it. It just looks so obvious when you know, you know. Just look at it and you think, why the hell didn’t you think there is somebody abducting a child. That was not even a thought, that somebody’s gonna go into an apartment and take a child out. You know, you’re probably the one person that could’ve actually stopped it and you think, oh, what if? It’s that what if? what if?, what if and you can take those what ifs to ad infinitum really.

Voice over: At 9.30 pm, half an hour after G’s check it was MO’s turn to look in on all the children. He went into the Mc’s apartment, but didn’t go into the bedroom and so didn’t see if Madeleine was missing.

MO: Pretty much from the approach down here, you can see straight into the room. So you can see the cots as you are walking in. So it never really felt like there was any real need to, sort of, go all the way into the room. Erm, you could see both cots and see into them from there. I, sort of, ummed and ahed about the angle and things. All I just know is that I had an unimpeded view and it was just dead quiet, and just… why I didn’t take those extra couple of steps in

G: Yeah, I mean, I was saying this earlier, that at no point, other than that night, did I go stick my head in. That was the only time, because the door was like that. I mean, I knew how I’d left it.

MO: It’s more that you know I’d felt you’d done enough. You’ve been and seen. It’s quiet.

G: Part of the reason we ended up coming through the back was the noise coming through the front door. We didn’t want to disturb them. Sigh. Stupid, now, isn’t it.

Voice over: It is possible that JT is not the only person who saw Madeleine being carried away by the abductor. 40 minutes after J(T)’s sighting and ½ mile away from the Mc’s apartment a family also saw a man carrying a young girl away from the town. Later the witness thought that this might have been GM. But, this was investigated and ruled out by the Portuguese police.

DE: A man was seen here carrying a child, just before 10 pm on the night Madeleine was abducted. When the man saw the family he appeared furtive and veered off to one side and carried on walking. Obviously, anyone carrying a child at night, it’s really important. We need to find out who this person was.

Family Witness Statement: I was with my family. We’d been out for the night and we were walking up the street when I saw a man and he was carrying a child. I thought they were father and daughter, so I wasn’t so suspicious. The girl was about 4, she looked like my granddaughter, blonde hair, pale white skin, typically British. The man didn’t look like a tourist. I can’t explain why. It was, probably, from his clothes.

G: Someone knows the information and someone knows who took Madeleine and someone knows where she is. Let’s get moving! Let’s get the phone ringing.

Voice over: At home K is preparing for the inevitable media attention that will surround the second anniversary of Madeleine’s disappearance.

K: ( Showing photo album) well this one. I think is really sweet and it’s Madeleine just when she arrived home from hospital, erm, to our house. I think she looks quite cute, wrapped up in a little bundle. She’s got those eyes. I tell you, those eyes that never closed.

For us they’re not just photos and especially now, not having Madeleine in our life, they’re more than photos and to me, each photo is very special. I mean, it’s Madeleine and we’ve given out so much of our daughter to the world really. You know, you just want to be able to retain some of it.

Voice of Interviewer: Are we allowed to see this one?

K: uh-hum (nods head in agreement)

Voice of Interviewer: Do you still feel her physically, as much as you did?

K: Tut… well, I know the Madeleine that I know, you know. I don’t know Madeleine at, you know, nearly six. She might look different. She could be speaking a different language (Scene shows her packing for trip to States) She might have her hair different, she might have different interests, but, you know, she’s still our daughter.

G: (holding up a suit). I think that’s pretty business-like isn’t it?

K: Yes

G: Right, put that away

Voice over: K&G are preparing for a trip to America that they hope will breathe new life into the search for Madeleine. As well as an interview on the OW show, they plan on visiting the world’s leading child recovery experts, who are creating an image of Madeleine aged six.

K: We’re going to America tomorrow and initially, we’re going to Washington to the NCMEC

EA: Circulating the photograph of, er, of a child, who was not quite four, two year’s later is not good enough.

When, we started this 10 year’s ago. The goal was to use technology, er, to keep these cases alive. To provide new hope for parents and new leads for law enforcement and we said at the time, wouldn’t it be great if we could actually find one of these kids and we found 900 of them. Er, everyone of these 900 cases, the child had been missing at least two years. So, what we’ve tried to do is to take your photos, er, as a guide. Young children’s faces change very quickly. As you can see, she has her mother’s jawline. She has her mother’s mouth. It’s striking. She has her mother’s dimples.

K: That’s me, as well, isn’t it? (referring to picture of her as a child)

EA: This is you, as well. Exactly.

K laughs

EA: But G, she has your nose.

G: The genes mix quite well. (Both laughing).

EA: They really do. They really do. I mean it’s a remarkable example of the best of genetics. So, leaning heavily, on heredity, and using every tool we can find, we truly believe that this is what Madeleine McCann looks like today and we hope that somebody, that millions of somebodies will look at the picture, but, that somebody will be moved to reach out and say, I think I have information.

G: I glanced It’s a different child and that is really important. It’s not the four year old or nearly four year old little girl and it’s hard, because, In our memory, we remember her the last day she was in Portugal and what she looked like, so…

K: It’s a very emotional thing, really, to see my daughter in a different way to how I remember her. Erm, so if I’m honest, initially, I, was quite upsetting and then I started to look at features and I thought, well, that’s definitely Madeleine and that bits Madeleine and, you know, yes, she is 2 year’s older.

EA: Despite the love and the care you that you put into raising her, at that age, Madeleine may not know she’s missing. Madeleine may have been told, well, now you are supposed to come with me. So, we hope that other children will look at this. It’s not inconceivable that she’s in a classroom somewhere. The goal here is to reach out to people around the world and say. Somebody knows something and if you do, call us.

Voice over: K&G now need to publicise this new image. The first step is to travel from Washington to Chicago for an interview on OWS, that will be broadcast in 144 countries.

G: It’s really important we get this image out, as far and as wide as possible. Because, ultimately, we don’t know where Madeleine is and if she was moved out of Portugal quickly, she could be anywhere and that’s the main reason for doing O(W) get that image out there

K: Nervous, but, it’s like anything we’ve done, you know, we’re doing it for a reason and the reason’s to held find Madeleine so just get on with it.

G: I actually think there’s not much more else we can do right now.

K: I think we’ve achieved a lot in the last few weeks and we’re really hoping that somebody who has been sitting there, knowing something, will suddenly feel the courage and compassion really to come forward and of course, we’ve also released the age progression image of Madeleine, now age 6 and I think that’s important. Because that’s almost appealing to people, who may know Madeleine, whatever Madeleine’s called now

K: So I feel, we’ve all worked really hard. I think what we’ve done is positive and productive. I actually feel the chance of us finding Madeleine is higher now, it’s more likely to yield a result and I actually feel a little excited, really, about what we’ve just done so.

G: I think it’s like, we want it out there, now. All the work’s been done and it’s all being co-ordinated round the anniversary. But we want it out and it’s just, let’s get moving.

K: We just need that one person, there might be more than one person, but one person to come forward and say I’ve seen that girl or I remember something from that night and that could unravel the whole thing.

Madeleine McCann doc draws 2.3m to C4, 08 May 2009

Madeleine McCann doc draws 2.3m to C4 Broadcast Now

Jon Rogers

Published: 08 May 2009 10:25, Last Updated: 08 May 2009 10:50

Two years after the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, a documentary in which her father revisited the Algarve resort where she was last seen drew an audience of 2.3m (10.5% share) for Channel 4 at 9pm.

Gerry McCann returned to apartment 5a in Praia da Luz where he last saw his daughter for the documentary Madeleine Was Here.

The hour-long programme, part of the Cutting Edge strand, held a largely stable audience throughout but picked up 2.4m over the last 30 minutes. The documentary was then seen by 262,000 on C4+1 an hour later.

It managed to outperform the channel's slot average for the year so far of 1.8m (7.9%) but couldn't quite match C4's performance in 2008 of 2.4m (10.7%).

The Cutting Edge programme managed to have the advantage over both of its nearest rivals.

Cutting Edge: Madeleine Was Here, 08 May 2009

Cutting Edge: Madeleine Was Here Timesonline

Tim Teeman

May 8, 2009

There is a very macabre dance around Madeleine McCann, as we mark the second anniversary of her disappearance. There are no law enforcement agencies on the case. Instead, alongside Kate, Madeleine's mother, two retired detectives are poring over recently released Portuguese police files. Last night's Cutting Edge was called Madeleine Was Here and — to keep yesterday's pre-transmission front pages furnished — revealed a suspect from deep within the files; a man who was, according to witnesses, watching the McCann's Praia da Luz apartment.

Gerry returned to the apartment block and some reconstructions were filmed. Last week, the McCanns appeared on The Oprah Winfrey Show with a computer-generated image of how their daughter would appear now.

To keep the chances of finding her alive, the McCanns have to keep the story alive, and Cutting Edge observed the McCanns at home: a picture of determinedly amiable domestic life emerged. But the family is uncomfortably beached between a desire for privacy and a desire for as much publicity as possible to find Madeleine.

This presents a problem for them, and for documentary-makers and journalists. The dripfeed of information (like the new suspect) and access to the McCanns is controlled by the family and their press representative Clarence Mitchell. The journalism of the Cutting Edge documentary was thus skewed to whatever the McCann's agenda was. It was hard to see what material Cutting Edge had uncovered itself: it seemed to just record whatever the McCanns wanted us to see.

Oprah quite reasonably asked them how their marriage had survived the last two awful years. The documentary, despite its access and illusion of family intimacy, didn't dare ask such things. When I asked Mitchell and the documentary-maker the same question at a screening on Wednesday, I received a curt dismissal: that wasn't the intention of Madeleine Was Here, apparently.

But that doesn't mean my question, or indeed any question is invalid just because it doesn't fit with the McCann/Mitchell agenda, especially when TV cameras have been invited into their home to show how jolly nice everything is under the circumstances.

Kate and Gerry McCann may well feel their privacy has been invaded, but then they want the media to do their bidding on their terms. It's a mess — a very unhappy, tragic one. The McCanns need the media and the media needs the McCanns, but it's a scrappy, compromising relationship for both sides. Let's hope it yields the desired result.

Madeleine McCann: conflicting eye witnesses, 08 May 2009

Madeleine McCann: conflicting eye witnesses Daily Mirror

By JON CLEMENTS

May 8, 09 09:39 AM

I watched the Channel 4 documentary last night about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and came to one conclusion - the more anyone looks into it the more confusing it gets.

We were told that several "new" eye witnesses saw a man staring at the McCann's apartment in Praia da Luz from the street in the days before Madeleine vanished, sometimes with a white van parked nearby.

Then we were told that an Irish family saw a man carrying a child through the streets 40 minutes after Jane Tanner, the McCanns friend, saw a man carrying a child in the street outside the apartment.

Interesting though this may be, I'm not convinced either sighting is much of a breakthrough or evidence pointing in any particular direction.

Is anybody seriously suggesting that a child snatcher would wander the streets with their victim for 40 minutes risking discovery at any second ?

If, as the eyewitnesses believed, the man was not a tourist, how would he possibly explain carrying a child who most definitely was on holiday ?

If the man spotted outside the apartment with the van was involved in the kidnapping why would be be carrying the child half a mile away 40 minutes later in the street when he could be 30 miles away speeding down the road ?

Both accounts could be correct but it is hard to see how both could be relevant to what happened to Madeleine.

Her parents tireless appeals for information are impressive but it is hard to see where or when the breakthrough will come.

Madeleine McCann documentary yields 'potentially significant' information, 08 May 2009

Madeleine McCann documentary yields 'potentially significant' information Telegraph

The broadcast of a new TV documentary about the disappearance of Madeleine McCann has led to "potentially significant" information for retired British detectives to pursue, her family's spokesman said.

Last Updated: 6:18PM BST 08 May 2009

More than 50 calls were made to the McCanns' investigative hotline following the airing of the programme, which highlighted three separate sightings of a suspicious man before the little girl vanished.

The callers offered "real, new information", including details of possible sightings of the missing child, family spokesman Clarence Mitchell said.

Madeleine was nearly four when she went missing from her family's holiday flat in Praia da Luz, southern Portugal, on May 3 2007 while her parents dined with friends nearby.

The new documentary, broadcast on Thursday night, highlighted three witnesses who saw an odd stranger who appeared to be watching the McCanns' apartment in the days before she disappeared.

An artist's impression based on one account of the man, who was described as "very ugly" with pitted skin and a large nose, was also released this week.

Madeleine's parents, Gerry and Kate McCann, from Rothley, Leicestershire, are employing two retired British policemen to continue the search for their daughter.

The former officers - ex-detective inspector Dave Edgar, 52, and ex-detective sergeant Arthur Cowley, 57 - scoured thousands of pages from the official Portuguese case files looking for clues.

They put the three reports of a suspicious stranger hanging around the McCanns' apartment together with two sightings of a man carrying a child away from the flat on the night Madeleine vanished.

Mr Mitchell said there was a good response to the programme, Madeleine Was Here, which was watched by 2.6 million people on Channel 4.

He said: "The investigative phone line has had at least 50 calls since the documentary.

"It's a very encouraging response because there is real, new information being given in some of these calls, information that the investigators are now able to set to work on.

"Some of the calls are coming from Portugal, and that's exactly where we need the information from.

"We will not go into detail but the investigators are very pleased with that response."

He added: "Many of the calls are offering real information that's potentially significant and can be worked upon. It's not speculative or vague."

The documentary will be shown by Portuguese broadcaster SIC on Monday and negotiations are under way to air it in other countries.

McCanns have paid enough for mistake, 09 May 2009

McCanns have paid enough for mistake News and Star

Anne Pickles

Last updated 09:00, Saturday, 09 May 2009

It's two years since Kate and Gerry McCann's daughter Madeleine went missing from their holiday apartment in Praia da Luz, Portugal.

Since then this couple has been haunted by loss, the frustration of not having been able to resolve the mystery of her disappearance and a steady flow of stories and developments surrounding the case which has enthralled the world.

The McCanns have never come across as a couple too enamoured with the media. Having to co-operate with press and broadcast news teams in order to keep the search for missing Maddie active must surely have rankled painfully with this otherwise private family.

But co-operation has been an imperative – and it continues to remain so, as they fight to refocus millions of minds on the search for their young daughter.

Madeleine Was Here (C4) was part of that uncomfortable partnership.

But how agonising must it have been for Kate and Gerry?

Watching Gerry returning to Portugal with a following camera crew and two of the friends who were with the McCanns at the tapas bar on the night Madeleine went missing, made uneasy viewing.

Not only was he having to relive the horror of that fateful night but also face publicly again some inescapable harsh realities. Had Maddie and her siblings not been left alone that evening, none of this might have happened.

This documentary attempted not only to reacquaint us with now all too familiar facts but also to give insight into McCann family life in the weeks leading up to the anniversary.

Kate has given up her job as a GP to look after Madeleine's brother and sister, Sean and Amelie – and concentrate on the Find Madeleine campaign. Gerry is back at work as a hospital consultant.

"We are far from normality, but we are closer to it than we once were," says Kate.

Sadness, guilt and despair are never far away. Kate and Gerry McCann live with a loss that can never be resolved unless and until Maddie comes home.

"She's either out there or she's not – and there's nothing to say she's not out there," Gerry insists. "She's out there until proven otherwise."

The hope is that she returns to her family sooner rather than much later. These haunted parents have paid enough for their mistakes on one hot summer’s night in Portugal.

Kate McCann's body language - 'Madeleine Was Here', 09 May 2009

Kate McCann's body language - 'Madeleine Was Here'

09 May 2009

With many thanks to Joana Morais for video clip

- The words say 'yes', the head says 'no'

Extract:

Kate McCann - "I mean, I knew straight away she'd, errr... been taken, you know."

As Kate reaches the end of this sentence she starts shaking her head from side-to-side, in a 'negative' motion, in direct contrast to the words she is speaking. Her words are telling us one thing but her subconscious is telling us a different story.

The movement is barely perceptible on first viewing but is clearly discernible on further viewings.

Gonçalo Amaral and Paulo Sargento debate the McCanns' documentary, 12 May 2009

Gonçalo Amaral and Paulo Sargento debate the McCanns' documentary SIC

Video available here (5th video down)

Transcript

12 May 2009

Thanks to Astro for transcript/translation

Merche Romero – Madeleine McCann disappeared two years ago. The intense investigation to discover the little girl's whereabouts ended without major results and the process was closed. Nevertheless, Maddie's parents reaffirm that their daughter was abducted and they say that they continue to search for the abductor. Today, the 12th of May, the day that marks Maddie's sixth birthday, SIC will broadcast, in the evening, a documentary that was made by a British television channel. We'll be showing you parts of that documentary, in an exclusive.

Before that, I'd like to welcome, and also present our guests: Dr Paulo Sargento and Gonçalo Amaral. A very good morning to you.

Paulo Sargento/Gonçalo Amaral: Good morning.

Merche Romero: And I start with the first question for Gonçalo Amaral: Should the police continue… ahm… what do you expect from this documentary?

Gonçalo Amaral: This documentary is a document. A document that is based on lies, which will be used, if some day the process is reopened, it will be used as evidence against those who go around saying those lies, trying to understand why.

Merche Romero: Dr Paulo Sargento… ahm… the… the truth is that this has been prompting a lot of talk, hasn't it? Ahh… the little girl's parents' attitude, namely during the interview with Oprah, did it surprise you?

Paulo Sargento: No, it didn't surprise me. Let's see, these things and definitely, that sometimes we, who comment on this case, we're criticised over some abuses concerning the evaluations and the diagnoses and etc… What I mean is, I never diagnosed anyone, because when I make a diagnosis it's in my office with the adequate methodology, and with the person in front of me. Nevertheless, an evaluation of people's behaviour can give us some… approaches, some theories about the manner in which they function.

Now, in this case, there is something that is very interesting, it's that in this case everything had been very manipulated in terms of image communication techniques, by a gentleman who is in fact a mastermind in that aspect, which is mister Clarence Mitchell – to whom I take my hat off, under that point of view, not for the rest, because it's a gentleman who has lied shamelessly and defamed some people, saying he's going to sue people; it's him who should have some lawsuits upon him.

Oprah's interview, for me, is a very simple matter, it was a construction, the questions were previously arranged, where the couple was previously given access to the questions, for that they prepared and even trained to answer them, there were not even hesitations, there were no overlapping speeches, let's say, of words from both sides, as one would expect to happen in a natural interview – like us sometimes, when we are here and one of us has another opinion and suggests – and the questions had especially a grammatical style that we've come to recognise well, which is a style, a style that I have sometimes jokingly - although we shouldn't joke too much about this - called 'Mitchellian', because it uses a type of fallacious arguments, that are already well known both on blogs and on television, and when they are used by him or by the couple. Alas, the person who imitates him very well in that style, it's for example Gerry McCann.

That matter, of confusing oneself many times, which is a well known fallacy, since the times of the tribunes in the ancient Rome of Caesar Augustus, of confusing the negation of the consequent with the affirmation of the antecedent, it's something very interesting, which they use systematically. From the point of view of image, I think that the only thing that we can take from that interview is that it was in fact something that was built to follow a different strategy, from the one that was foreseen at least two weeks earlier. Because if we recall two weeks earlier, the strategy was to focus on the location of the disappearance, with the face of the three-year-old child.

Merche Romero: And that is precisely what we are [interrupts Paulo Sargento's train of thought], we're moving on, we're going to focus on the documentary, ah, that is going to be broadcast by SIC this evening. The first excerpt, let's watch…

Excerpt of the McCanns' documentary with Sean, Madeleine's younger brother, and Kate painting the three children's names.

Sean: That is a lovely picture you're making, mummy.

Kate: Thanks honey, do you know what it says?

Sean: No… (makes funny noises /onomatopoeias)

Kate: What names do you think that is, Sean?

Sean: Amelie…

Kate: Who's your other sister?

Sean/Amelie: Maddie.

Kate: There you go…

Kate: I honestly believe they're expecting her to come home, you know, one day soon. They very much… 'When Madeleine comes back, we'll share our toys', and you know, Amelie is wearing Madeleine's shoes, she'll say 'This won't fit Madeleine now, so we'll have to take her and get a bigger pair of shoes when she gets home', you know?

Merche Romero: Kate, the children's mother, talks about the hope that she and her other children, Maddie's siblings, foster concerning the little girl's return. (turns to Gonçalo Amaral) Dr Paulo Sargento, from these images, right, what's the picture that you draw of this family?

Gonçalo Amaral: I'm not Paulo Sargento…

Merche Romero: Ah, forgive me. Forgive me, Dr Gonçalo Amaral.

Gonçalo Amaral: No problem. I wouldn't want to comment on these images a lot, it's a mother in suffering, she's lost a daughter, and she has the right to say whatever she wants, so there's nothing here…

Merche Romero: But the fact that she's feeding – now, yes (turns towards Paulo Sargento) – the mother feeds the children's hope in the girl's return…

Paulo Sargento: Of course… I agree with Dr Gonçalo Amaral, in what he says, there is in fact a mother that suffers, there's a family that suffers, no matter what happened. Well, this is a solid fact, it's not possible, let's say to think - or it's very hard to think - that people aren't suffering. No matter what happened, this is necessary to have as a solid fact. Now, there's something that should be avoided as well. I understand that all the pacts among the adults, among the large groups, like the Tapas nine, among the couple, all pacts are possible.

Now, what I've been saying and, I think, should stir these people's conscience, is to keep the twins out of the pacts. I mean, this issue of transmitting hope, that there is no certainty, quite to the contrary, if there is one it's the possibility that the girl will never appear again, and to make the twins live, in fact, this nightmare is a complete irresponsibility, not to say it's an exercise in bad parenting, a completely shameful one.

Gonçalo Amaral: Let me say just one thing.

Merche Romero: Say it, say it, say it.

Gonçalo Amaral: It's that at the time of the events, only a few days later, we tried to speak with the twins, and what this couple told us, was that they didn't express themselves well, despite being two years old; that they couldn't speak very well and so on. As a matter of fact it seems that, two years later, they're doing better; they're now four years old, so it's normal. But at the time, they would know something or they might know. And that's it, we didn't force it, because these were two children.

Paulo Sargento: Of course.

Gonçalo Amaral: Today we see them using the children, at the time they didn't want to the police to speak with them, and now they allow them [the children] to be used in this way.

Paulo Sargento: By the way do you know…

Merche Romero – [Interrupts Paulo Sargento] Let us move to the second excerpt of this documentary.

Excerpt McCanns US Visit

Voice Over: The McCanns are organising a series of events aimed at prompting fresh evidence, including a difficult trip back to the holiday resort. A national TV appearance in the US, and maybe even more importantly a visit to the world's leading child recovery expert.

Ernie Allen [CEO and President of the National Center for Missing & Exploited Children]: We truly believe that this is what Madeleine McCann looks like today.

Cut to the morphing of Maddie's image into a 6-year-old

Gerry McCann: She's either out there or she's not and there's nothing to say that she's not out there alive. So it's simple, she's out there until proven otherwise.

Emma Loach [the 36-year old director of the ITV/Channel4 documentaries of 'Madeleine, One Year On' 2008 and 'Maddie was Here' 2009]: Who is actually out there looking for Madeleine?

Gerry McCann: Hopefully lots of people, er… and the general population, but in terms of an investigative strategy, then there's no law enforcement agency that is proactively doing anything. It's pretty amazing really, ahm, when you think about it. It's a very serious crime… and ahm... we've, we've got to do it.

Merche Romero: In this fragment of the documentary, we see the visit of Maddie's parents to a specialist centre for the recuperation of missing children, and we saw a portrait which shows how Maddie looks like now, aged 6-years-old. But it has also raised my attention how Maddie's father shows indignation because the police are not carrying on the investigation into the disappearance. Gonçalo Amaral, the police should go on searching for Maddie?

Gonçalo Amaral: Yes, they should, and they are not doing it only because the couple demanded the archival and they won't permit that there's any investigation in Portugal or in England, overlapping all the actions that have been added there [to the process]. And now they perform as victims, when, in fact, it is them who do not want a police investigation. They prefer to have private investigators, under contract, who are paid their 'weight in gold', to find the 'abductor'.

So, they don't trust in the Portuguese Police or in the English Police. We cannot forget that the little girl is English, and that there is a competency of the British authorities to investigate.

Now they come, yet again, playing the victims, I mean, this shameless situation is long overdue and it's time to stop. I would give them some advice, to really stop for a while, to think; given that they are drowning in the lies that they have been saying.

Merche Romero: Dr. Paulo Sargento, there's a moment when we see Maddie's dad arriving at the Ocean Club, in the Algarve, and we hear people jeering and telling him 'Go Home!'; how is this reaction explained?

Paulo Sargento: I believe that was very well picked up under the scope of imagery, in the documentary. It was worked on, giving the impression that it was a tough trip; hard to come back. If we are really attentive, what in reality exists in the documentary it's a jeer or two, it's not exactly a monumental jeer, as they wished it to be perceived, it's one or two, made by one single person who most probably, and was legitimately angered. Probably, one of the workers, (video jumps) (…) now, it's not because of this that one has - like the English media has being doing with absolutely shameful and indecorous behaviour - to present the people of Praia da Luz as a series of vandals and evildoers who do not wish the McCann's return, and who are, so to say, despising and mistreating them, etc…

What we hear there, factually, is two jeers, probably by a citizen more desperate in his anguish of being unemployed, and which attributes, objectively or not, but legitimately I believe, to the McCann's actions causing his unemployment, which was in fact true, since their actions created an extreme negative publicity for that region, and a vandalised billboard, which if we walk in the streets, we see two, three per day, and no one will, for that, go on about [whine]. Now it was exaggerated, one has to say it was exaggerated. There is a campaign of counter-marketing taking advantage of small insinuations to spread the idea that the people of Praia da Luz are against the McCann which is not true.

Merche Romero: Let's move on to the third excerpt. Let's watch it and in a while we comment on it.

Excerpt of Dave Edgar - one of the retired cops working as a private detective for the McCanns and Kate McCann in a meeting

Dave Edgar: We're here to discuss the pending reconstruction that we're running.

Kate McCann: So, basically it looks like we have five sightings really. Two of a man with a child, and three… just a suspicious individual really.

Dave Edgar: Yeah.

Kate McCann: And three, the three, with the suspic… suspicis… of the suspicious, they kind'a tie in together.

Dave Edgar: They all tie in together, yeah.

Unknown woman's voice: Similar times, similar places…

Dave Edgar: Yeah. These three in exactly the same location. I don't know what the, the Portuguese authorities have done to actually have this people removed from the inquiry… So, we've got to presume they haven't done it. And, and go with that. So, it's just important we actually, we're accurate, hum, what we actually, what we know and make sure that's what we're going with. No speculation or… it's just got be the facts that we know and not… try to fill in the gaps of what we don't know.

Kate McCann: I mean, I'd like to go back but… not for this, to be honest, it's kind of just below the surface, and I, just you know… I'd be scared, I think, you know, to sort of open up again , really, yeah…

Cut to Kate McCann in Rothley: I think it's actually going through… the scenario of that night, as well, you know?... ahm.. I mean, you know, even what I can remember of the night, you know, seeing Gerry… ahm... that distraught, really... sobbin' and on the floor… I mean, I, I, I suppose I'm concerned that will surface again.

Merche Romero: In these images we saw two private investigators hired by the McCanns to search for Maddie. They are paid from the Find Madeleine fund. These two men criticise the lack of the investigation of some evidence by the Portuguese authorities. Gonçalo Amaral, was there evidence left to be investigated?

Gonçalo Amaral: No, there was no evidence left to investigate. We investigated wrongly, in that case, yes, wrongly - there the FBI was right – we should have immediately considered the parents as suspects, and started there, however we went to the limit relative to the kidnap; up to the moment where we saw that the abduction was materially impossible. And then we went back to Praia da Luz and we focused on the apartment, where the traces and indicia of the death of the child were detected.

What these gentlemen say - let's not forget that they are paid by the fund, there's a contract and it's a contract to find a child alive, for the kidnap, only the kidnap and nothing else but the kidnap. It would be good that people knew that those gentlemen, after I left [the coordination to the investigation], they tried to collaborate with the Police, they tried to meddle in the investigation – which was denied by some colleagues who were in the investigation at the time, since the Portuguese Police and the English Police have competence to investigate alone, they do not need that kind of support. Thus, there is this situation, of people who are paid for this, they are paid to say this, and they are paid to say this lie.

The process has seventeen volumes, look at them and find what is missing relatively to this; these sightings, these tales of the new abductors, the people who were seen, who were seen a month or two before… I remember that I was in Amsterdam, last week, when I was contacted with the information that a 'new abductor' was going to appear. I said 'look, it has to be an individual with a Mediterranean type of look, very ugly, very dark...' - the fact is that we start to know the couple, the type of witness that they have, and it's always like that.

The shame is, that in the sightings that they say that are there, the McCanns and their detectives don't say that the man who was in the garden, at 8am - who was seen by a student whose grandmother lived in that apartment - is a match to David Payne, in terms of physical appearance and as to what he was wearing - and it's a shame they don't say that. Because, as to the others; the gardener that was there; the man who lived in the car, all of that was investigated - and they were British as well - as a matter of fact they were poorly dressed, but some were British. There was a singer, on the beach, who played the guitar...

So, saying that we didn't do anything is a complete lie.

And I hope that, for Alípio Ribeiro not to be named as the only one who did not defended us, that this new direction of the Judiciary Police, when this documentary comes out has the courage to defend those who worked, those who served the Judiciary Police, because if they don't do it, they will be seen in a very harsh way by those who work for that institution and give everything to it.

Merche Romero: Dr, Paulo Sargento, Maddie's parents bet everything in the investigations, ehh, which are paid in 'gold' [Portuguese Expression as in ‘weight in gold’], right? So, to go on investigating and to invest so much in these searches; those that mean that they feed the feeling that their daughter is alive? To themselves?

Paulo Sargento: No, let us consider... I should say here, something, so that the idea is not left in the 'air', that there's something against the couple, or something similar, there is not, in fact...

Merche Romero: There is a mystery.

Paulo Sargento: Yes, there is a mystery. And when I said before that issue regarding the bad parenting in the sense of the twins being put in, let's say, in the middle of the affair, it wasn't done with the objective of hurting them or calling them names, just to call them names - that it's in fact only excusable if, by any reason, these people are really suffering a lot, this of putting the twins in the middle, it's an act, not excusable but understandable, amidst this suffering. That is exactly why I'm not more critical.

Relative to this, I'm convinced, actually, I completely prefer Gonçalo Amaral's theory, that something indeed happened there, the girl died there, the body was... was hidden... was moved to another place... But that, whatever has happened, certainly has the parents knowledge. There is a story here, many times told by the defenders of the abduction, who say: 'how would it be possible - if the parents had something to do with this - that they continued to insist on this search and in this media attention?' I would say this is like a FAQ – Frequently Asked Questions.

It is possible. It is possible because for a long time, the parents were very quiet, and Clarence Mitchell as well – trying to extinguish the phenomena.

If it weren't for the effort of some people saying 'this cannot be left in this way...' I recall that Gerry McCann didn't write for three months in his blog, and once I published an article – I'm not going to say that he answered my article because I published the text, no, I don't have that vanity – but something indeed took place, I wrote an article asking 'what is happening, is the notoriety of a big brand named 'Maddie' extinguishing?' – three months without an entry in Gerry's blog, and two days later, the father 'answers'; he doesn't answer, I mean, he writes in his blog: 'Well, we haven't written in a long time, but this does not mean that we are not developing hard work in the search for Madeleine - but now more discreetly and away from the media which has only disturbed, etc... etc... etc...'

So, this type of issue, this variation between the process of search in situ for the girl, then it moves on to a globalised search; which makes one think that, in reality, what matters is to keep something that was started. I'm convinced, honestly and fully convinced, that they started with an intent, which then took on an uncontrollable magnitude, and then - I'm not saying this just for the parents but, as well, for Mr. Gordon Brown - and then, people intrude in affairs from which they don't know how to get out.

The McCann documentary analysed by forensic psychologist Paulo Sargento, 13 May 2009

The McCann documentary analysed by forensic psychologist Paulo Sargento TVMais (appears in paper edition only)

From the pretence of the reconstruction of the facts, of the 3rd of May 2007, when Maddie disappeared, there's no more than a few minutes. Then, one can see a happy family.

by Hernâni Carvalho

13 May 2009

Thanks to Astro for translation

Kate McCann saw the open window. Thus starts the McCanns' documentary. To tell you the truth, the window was opened by Kate herself, as proved by the lophoscopic (fingerprints) analyses that were made by the PJ on the windows of apartment 5A, at the Ocean Club, in Praia da Luz. Thus starts the documentary that SIC broadcast last Tuesday.

From the pretence of the reconstruction, we saw, all in all, less than five minutes. But we saw a happy family. A perfect one. Kate paints with the twins, she takes them to watch the chicken, the ducks and the horses. She peels potatoes and greets Gerry when he arrives after a day of medical consults. To be certain, we even saw Maddie's father's patients. Kate was also a doctor, part time, but now all she does is to care for the children. Life as it is for perfect, complying parents.

Now, the McCanns protect the twins. When half of the world was searching for Maddie, the twins' faces could be seen. Even on the day that they landed in England, after leaving Faro with State honours, without having been subject to any inspection at the airport, like it happens to everyone else. The McCann documentary is a television making work of art. Concerning the coherence of the facts that were broadcast, that's another issue.

'Tvmais' watched the McCann documentary in the company of forensic psychologist Paulo Sargento. And we registered his comments.

Paulo Sargento: As was expected, the announced reconstruction by the McCanns resulted in an image laundering attempt, that in my opinion is disastrous.

In truth, they didn’t dare to call this production a "reconstruction"...

P.S.: Yes, but they suggested that this was a documentary that would provide new clues.

And did they do that?

P.S.: No. Right away because neither the actors served the purpose nor the reconstruction of the night when Maddie disappeared is even complete. They only used one actress to play the inconsistent role of Jane Tanner.

Maybe there's another documentary in waiting…

P.S.: That could be it... Notice that Matthew Oldfield played himself, very briefly, and Gerry McCann was counselling and little more. It's bizarre that the documentary occupies itself with the reconstruction for less than one tenth of its total length (50 minutes).

Matt Oldfield and Jane Tanner at the Ocean Club

What do you say about Jane Tanner's testimony?

P.S.: Hardly credible. The alleged abductor walks slowly, in an excessively lit area (under the street lamp), for Jane not to be able to remember any trace of his face. And yet, she remembers difficult details like the colour of the trousers, the jacket and the type of shoes.

And the statements from five persons who saw the "ugly" man?

P.S.: It's interesting that the man was only seen by English people, and almost exclusively during the day.

The Smiths saw him at 9.50 p.m.

P.S.: Yes. But on a location and walking into a direction that were opposed to those that were mentioned by Jane Tanner. What's even more curious is the fact that the witness mentions that "he doesn't look like a tourist", carrying "a little girl with long blonde hair". This is impressive. A little English-looking girl, being carried away by a person who didn't look like a tourist. The so-called 'ugly man'. Adding to the fact that he was only seen by English people, during the day, wearing a black jacket (not a brown one, like Jane mentions), he appears too early in the story. The first testimony dates from the 29th of April and one of the detectives speaks a lapidary sentence: "Someone watched the apartment for a week or more". Well, if Maddie disappeared on the 3rd of May and the McCanns arrived on the 28th of April..., this is called a FRAUD!

Gerry McCann, Jane Tanner and Matt Oldfield at the entrance to the Ocean Club

In the documentary, there is a new piece of data. Gerry, Kate and Matthew admit that they didn't even enter the children's bedroom and they say it was too dark to be see clearly whether Maddie was there or not.

P.S.: That's where Gerry betrays himself. He states that when he looked into the room, he remembers thinking how beautiful Madeleine was and how much he loved her and how proud he was to be the father of three beautiful children. Gerry says that he felt that when he "looked into the bedroom". Just watch the documentary again.

Nevertheless, the detectives say that they are hopeful…

P.S.: Detectives don't operate on hope. Detectives work with hypothetical-deductive methods, based on evidence and indications.

Kate McCann painting, with the twins, at home in Rothley

At least, we now know the McCanns' everyday life?

P.S.: Not even that. It's daily life that is TOO NORMAL for someone who has suffered one of the most devastating blows that a human being can suffer: the loss of a daughter. Everything smells artificial and plastic. The relationship with the twins, the phone call with Jane Tanner, Gerry's professional routines, Kate waiting for him... All in all, an old, well-known strategy of promoting the image of a happy family, which in this case, becomes grotesque. Just notice Gerry McCann's sentence: "We're a family, a happy family, but incomplete..." As much as we want to, not everything is what it seems to be!