Madeleine McCann Investigation Continues

Five years ago, I conducted a running battle on this site with people who wished to smear the good name of Madeleine McCann’s grieving parents, and in the end they had to concede that they had absolutely no basis for suggesting that Kate and Gerry McCann had anything to do with the disappearance of their daughter.

kate gerry mccann madeleine mccann

The slurs on the good name of the McCanns emanated largely from the unbelievably incompetent Portuguese police who wished to deflect attention from their bumbling ham-fisted management of the case, until finally they were forced by facts to admit that the McCanns were not suspects.  They tried to frame an innocent man, Robert Murat, and when all else failed, they launched a smear campaign.

It continues.

Today, as British police announce that they want to interview certain suspects, a new crop of trolls appear on social media, spreading all sorts of defamatory lies about the McCanns, such as the claim that they waited 72 hours before reporting the disappearance.

This is an utter fabrication, but it prompts the question: who benefits from such lies?  There can only be two beneficiaries.  The perpetrators of the crime, and the Portuguese police.  Since it’s unlikely that the kidnappers have any interest in going public, the field narrows down to one suspect — the incredibly incompetent police who handled this case.

I sincerely hope that Kate and Gerry McCann pursue the authors of these lies through the courts for defamation.  It’s perfectly possible to do so these days, and they’ve suffered enough without being subjected to such a nasty, evil agenda.


All posts on Madeleine McCann

26 thoughts on “Madeleine McCann Investigation Continues

  1. Wow, I’ve never read such a clear and insistant post from you Bock.
    Where did you read the facts that have led you to such a definite conclusion?
    I’m not normally one for the sort of tabloid rubbish that has surrounded the case but curiosity got the better of me over the last couple of days. It would probably be good to balance that with information that might be more reliable.

  2. Mark, it’s very simple. If you have evidence that the McCanns were complicit in the disappearance of their child, produce it now. Otherwise, they’re innocent.

    Do you have that evidence?

  3. The attitude of the Portuguese authorities poisoned this investigation and their ongoing reluctance to co-operate even now shames them further. Due to the appalling initial investigation the truth may never emerge. Perhaps the McCann’s were unwise but to say the things that has been said about them (you know what I mean, I won’t repeat the slurs) is in itself criminal libel. My prayers are for Madeline.

  4. The tone of this article is so peremptory and emphatic, am not sure why you even allow comments on it.

    ‘Good name of the McCanns’…? The same McCanns who left three toddlers alone while they wined and dined.

  5. Dined by the poolside, a 30-second walk from the kids’ bedroom. How long does it take you to get to your kids’ bedroom, or do you eat your dinner in there while they sleep?

  6. Literally adding insult to injury by charging and trying to frame them and other people nearby for the abduction.

    It’s a great shame the Mc Cann’s have not turned their ability to raise cash and awareness to the good of other families who are less well off and connected than them.

    While no one could blame them for doing everything in there power to find their daughter, it’s a bit of a missed opportunity, and possible a bit of a waste of money to date. There was a story a few years back of a large amount of money being paid to a Private Investigation Company, who were always on the verge of a breakthrough.

    There has been millions spent to date with very little to show for their efforts, And now it’s back to Scotland yard

  7. @ A Little Cynical. Emphatic certainly,in attempting to reinforce the principle of the presumption of innocence. Peremptory? Not in the least,see the question(as yet unanswered)in post No.2 above.
    No doubt you will answer the question put to you regarding your prandial inclinations.

  8. There’s an incredibly self-righteous tone to much of the criticism of the McCanns, almost as if people are thinking it serves them right.

  9. The crime here is that a monster took a child from her parents, from everything and everyone one she ever knew and ever loved for reasons I don’t want to fathom, that little girl is still missing, the monsters that took still out there. They have never been caught. These are the things that we must think about rather than berating the McCain’s.

  10. @ Bock

    I think alot of the ill will toward the McCanns started (if I recall) when her mother released a book on Madeleine. Of course releasing a book in itself doesnt equate to them being guilty of anything, but I must say I did do a double take myself at the time. It just seemed like a very “off” thing to do, and many felt (myself a bit too) that they were cashing in on their childs (potential) death.

  11. I saw that the other night. The Portuguese police made a monumental mess from the very start. To try and cover up for this, they tried to shift the blame to the parents, who in fairness, badly managed the situation. Madeleine could be standing right in front of anyone now and wouldn’t be recognised. She also will not remember what happened seven years ago. Is the only reason this is so high profile is the fact that he was running for MP a few years ago and has connections?

  12. The case is back in the news becase the Met have announced that they’re looking for a particular suspect. Which is a lot more than the politically-driven Portuguese police managed. All they did was try to frame an innocent man and smear the parents.

  13. I can’t see how this can possibly now be solved. Unless they come across by chance some conspiracy by chance. As I said, she will be unrecognisable and unable to remember anything. Although, the UK coppers are fairly on the ball when they get down to business. “Hi, are you Maddie” “I have no idea, neither do these people”

  14. As this isn’t a court of law, surely it’s not unreasonable for people to air their opinions here about what they feel might have happened, without others, who perhaps hold conflicting views, taking up an overly aggressive stance towards them?
    Whether the McCanns are innocent or guilty of any crime, asking for proof to back up any expressed opinion from bystanders is obviously pointless. People are merely expounding views, based on a multitude of reasons, loony or otherwise. Proof will presumably, and hopefully, only come in time from a reliable source.
    I should also point out that, unless someone actually knows differently, the McCanns cannot accurately be described as “innocent” of any perceived crime. If they were suspects, which the Met. assures us they are not, then in English law they would be described as “presumed innocent”, unless or until such time as they are found otherwise.

  15. What aggression? People are trying to defame the McCanns without any basis. Presumed innocent means innocent. I presume you’re innocent of any crime. Does that mean you’re more likely to be a criminal? They have never been charged with anything, and the Portuguese authorities have already formally confirmed that they had nothing to do with the child’s disappearance.

    I hate this kind of side-of the-mouth smearing that people engage in.

  16. Dear boy-You do seem extraordinarily prickly about this. I don’t think anyone is “trying to defame the McCanns” but merely, as I said, express their opinions. What is actually wrong in that? The fact that those opinions don’t coincide with yours seems to bring out the ogre in you, and I trust you aren’t referring to me when you speak of “side-of-the-mouth smearing”?
    As you are normally such a stickler for factual statements, please do get your facts right. There is a world of difference between presumed innocence and actual innocence. You surely know that presumption of innocence is a legal definition meaning just that. It’s a prior assumption of innocence, with the onus then placed on the prosecution to prove otherwise. It most certainly does not mean that that person IS actually “innocent” of any crime. You appear to believe the McCanns are “innocent” and to do so is, of course, your prerogative, but that in itself doesn’t actually make them innocent. Only the law can decide that.

  17. Don’t call me dear boy.

    Get your facts straight. There is no prosecution and therefore no presumption of innocence. They are simply innocent, full stop.

  18. The presumption of innocence is a legal instrument. Since there is no legal process,only an investigative one,in train here,the presumption of innocence is a misnomer.
    The McCanns are in fact and in law innocent. Indisputably so.

  19. I’m sorry, but I fail to see how you can blithely describe the McCanns as innocent. Innocent of what exactly? Do they, in your opinion, come out of this utterly guilt-free?
    They may well be innocent of any direct action that lead to their daughter’s death or abduction, but their actions on the night of her disappearance can only be seen as directly contributing to her fate, whatever that fate was. How else can it be viewed? I cannot imagine any parent of children as young as these leaving them in such a fashion as the McCanns appeared to have done. If these people had been “benefit scroungers” leaving their kids at home, unattended, to go drinking down at the local boozer and the kids had vanished, what would you have said then? Would you have said they were “innocent”?
    Never mind the child molester/abductor/murderer, what about all the other things small children suffer from at night? Would you have left your children in the same manner?

    Your peremptory manner in replying leads me to bid you a fond farewell dear boy. No doubt you’ll be pleased to learn that I shan’t be troubling you again.
    Pip pip!

  20. Looks like you’re not able for robust debate, Johnny boy. Being condescending is fine, but being corrected is too much for you.

    At least I’m glad to see that you’ve withdrawn the snide implication that the McCanns were somehow guilty of a criminal act.

    You’ve made progress. progress.

    Now, we’re talking about your personal disapproval and judgement of their standard of parenting, and that’s an entirely different discussion.

  21. @John Show some emotional intelligence John and stop being so viscous. Whatever you believe regarding parental negligence on the night in question nobody having to deal with the loss of a child should be subject to moral crusaders with rigid outlooks like yourself. As has been pointed out, there is no legal action being taken against them therefore they are entirely innocent. Give them a break and have some compassion. Your anger is nauseous to anyone who connects with both thoughts and feelings and not just cold logic when viewing a tragic situation such as this. Your behaving like Mr Spock and
    regardless of how you present your argument from the point of view of adult debate it still reads like its been written by someone with the moral development of a child.

  22. Bock,

    I am not conversant with this case and my knowledge of it is only what I could piece together from various media reports by and by but I did take an interest.
    Firstly, I would like to make it clear that I do not believe that the McCanns are in any way implicated in the loss of their own daughter nor do I believe that they were in any way irresponsible. They are grieving parents who have enough to endure without all sorts of incredible stories being concocted about them.

    Next, I don’t want to sound like a conspiracy nut, but the abduction of the child happened when the parents were very nearby and definitely within easy earshot and there were two other children in the room at the time and the room itself was not that easy to access, coming or going. Now, if the child was indeed abducted, and I think that this is established, she did not wander off into the sea or somewhere obscure, then I must admit that the whole affair has very much the signs of a professional kidnapping — it was not the random work of some smelly pervert on the opportunity. Sorry, but unless I am wrong in my recollection of the basic facts, then the whole incident has all the marks of a high level of organization and professionalism.

  23. Oh look there are some girls clothes in scrub land not far from where Maddie disappeared. Portugese police dismissed it as not important?!! Do they have kds??

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.