Enfants Kidnappés 7/08/08: A Belgian paedophile network?

http://www.kidnapping.be/maddie/maddie.html

Chiens policiers


Lieve Pellens, spokesperson for the Federal Prosecutor, stated that, "The Belgian Federal Prosecutor has received no information from the British or Portuguese investigators according to which the little English girl Madeleine McCann would have been abducted at the instigation of a Belgian paedophile network," the information coming from the British media. Once again, this trail is not new. We have already spoken about it. It was Toscano who started this rumour. This Spaniard passes himself off as a journalist, specialising in missing children, having already found several. He was interviewed on several occasions by the Portuguese authorities but his allegations were very quickly ruled out.

We have even stated here that Toscano was, "not credible," and we stick to it. Above all, Toscano was seeking to get himself talked about when he was intending to publish a book. As for the children whom he would have found, he has never been able to prove it. It was he who had set off the false trail for: El Frances. El Frances was found a short time later. He is interested in little boys and not little girls. He was very quickly ruled out as a potential suspect following thorough checks. The British press is coming up with that old story as if it was a new lead and Clarence Mitchell is still acting surprised as if this was the first time it was mentioned!

Alright, let's be clear that if there are paedophile networks, they are not structured. The networks, "get their supplies," another way. First of all there are members of the network who, "offer," their own children. Then, there are parents who rent out their children for an hour or for a whole of a weekend. The networks get their supplies, in Belgium, as in France, in the UK and in other countries, in certain of their country's orphanages who all rent out children. A Belgian journalist is in the process of preparing a comprehensive book on the subject. And finally, it is very very easy to buy a child.

In some countries, less industrialised than us, a real parallel economy has been developed in the sale of children. They are sold with a guarantee of their good health. Satisfied or exchanged! Genuine!! These children are sometimes sold for just 40 €! So, why take the risk of abducting a child abroad, traveling with her, with the risks involved, without taking into account the infrastructure and people needed to organise, plan, logistically support and move a kidnapped child!! Abductions are mostly carried out by a lone predator or by a very small group of two or three predators, often badly organised.

The Maddie frenzy having restarted, I am ready to bet that we will soon have new witness statements from people who are will have seen Maddie in all corners of the world!


Police dogs.

In this case there is a lot of talk about dogs that detect blood and dogs that detect bodies. They have played a key role in the aftermath of events. To understand how these dogs react, we asked an expert on the subject. But before asking him questions, we need to understand that a dog trained by the police has nothing in common with one privately trained.

The police have technical resources available but above all criminal experience on the ground so that the training of their dogs has nothing in common with clubs for training open to individuals. This idea is important because it lets us distinguish between the objectives of a private trainer who does not have the skills of the police and those of a professional police dog handler, trained in techniques of which the individual has no idea.

We must also understand that the dog's sense of smell is trained and by his training the police dog surpasses his peers in the use of the same organ. Or to give you a clearer idea, an individual's normal untrained dog is capable of smelling a drop of vinegar in a bathtub full of water. This capacity being developed by his training, you can easily imagine the power of the sense of smell of this type of dog.

Our expert, who must remain anonymous, is a chief dog handler for finding human remains. A serving police officer, he and his dog are known and respected in police canine circles. Being still in service and not yet having received a positive response from his superiors for participating in our interview, we are obliged to guarantee his anonymity.

• Can the odour of blood be detected after a detergent wash?

The dog is perfectly able to detect traces of blood, dilute residues. These residues may be trapped in minute spaces between fibres. Thus, in one case, our dogs found residues trapped in the joins between the floor tiles of a room.

• How long after cleaning can the dogs still smell the odour of blood?

We have had positive results several weeks after the fact. According to the frequency of cleaning, this time limit may be shorter. If premises are cleaned daily or several times a day, the time limit for detection may be reduced to a few days, rather than weeks. On the other hand, if cleaning is only weekly, the time limit may be four weeks before the disappearance of the odour for the dogs.

• The dog only detects the odour of blood or the human cadaver odour?

We must make a distinction here. The dog carries, "imprints," of very specific odours. Something like drugs dogs who have, olfactory "imprints," of narcotics. These imprints are listed in his head. He never forgets them. However, the odour of blood is an odour of blood! That means that the dog does not distinguish between the odour of human blood and the odour of animal blood. That is why the lab is always with us when we use our dogs. On the other hand, at home, the human cadaver dog and the one that detects blood only do one. Each of our dogs detects the two odours. In contrast to our friends at New Scotland Yard who have a deluxe version: two different dogs - one for each odour. The training and the techniques used are the same. There is no difference in, "capability," between the dogs. The advantage in having two different dogs is in the fact that if the, "cadaver," dog marks a place and the dog that detects blood does not, we can deduce that the victim died without blood loss. As is the case with strangulation for example.

• For how long must a body remain in place for the odour to be detectable by the dogs?

There are several possibilities. If there was blood flow at the time of death, the odour would be detectable immediately. What we call, "blood flow," signifies that the victim had blood loss. Whether due to blows received or banging themselves while falling, doesn't matter, as long as there is blood flow. It is here that having two dogs makes sense. Ours immediately smells the odour of blood, although he detects both. The British police will go with the two dogs but only the dog that detects blood will react. In short, the dog will detect the odour of blood (due to blood flow at the time of death) sooner than cadaver odour which will not yet be well-defined.

On the other hand, if there was no blood flow, death by strangulation, for example, there is a certain delay before decomposition of the body. As long as that decomposition has not taken place, the dog would only be able to detect the scent of a human being. Thus, if there was no blood, - I stress, the body would take several days to decompose. Under normal atmospheric conditions, in our climate it will be several days before the odour is detectable by the dog.And this,even if the body is buried beneath several metres of concrete or camouflaged by other subterfuges which I cannot talk about here. Of course, decomposition can be more rapid. If the body is stored in a damp cellar, decomposition would be more rapid and as a result, the odour detectable more rapidly. According to a police convention between several European countries and outside the EEC (Editor's note: a convention that both the UK and Portugal are part of), it is accepted that the body takes 72 hours before the odour is detectable.

• In the context of the accidental death of a child, could the odour be detectable if the body only remained a maximum of two hours in the apartment?

Once more, we must be careful. If there was no blood flow, then I am clear: NO! It is impossible! The dog would have smelt the laying down of human scent. And if there was blood flow, only the dog that detected blood would react and not the one that detected human cadaver odour. The body could thus be moved during, around 72 hours, before the cadaver odour was detectable. This time limit is reduced to 48 or 24 hours hours in tropical climates.

• Cadaver odour detected by the dogs, could it come from contamination? Clothes bearing cadaver odours which were contaminating the room where the dog works?

Yes, it is theoretically possible. Contamination of a place by clothes already carrying cadaver odour is plausible. Thus, a person working in a morgue could, through negligence, contaminate another place by carrying the odour there. But the dog has not failed in his work. In our example, the dog will mark the cadaver odour because that odour is well and truly there! The way that odour was brought into the place is another thing which the investigators, and not the dogs, have to clear up! On the other hand, if the odour of blood is also detected, then we can reasonably place in doubt the theory of contamination. This remains very theoretical and I must say that in 15 years of work and practical canine interventions in complex criminal cases, I have never come across this. Because to be valid, the person contaminating the place would have to be there in their work clothes (in the example of a morgue employee). If that person has changed their clothes or washed, there would be nothing to contaminate the place.

Justice USA style: Sentencing juveniles to life without parole.

Living in hell for life

The USA has 5% of the world's population and 25% of the world's prisoners.

One in every 100 adults in the USA is in prison.

The USA has an even more significant record in the numbers of people sentenced to spend the rest of their lives behind bars: Life without parole.

"Paul Wright, the editor of Prison Legal News and author of two books on the prison system--who himself served 17 years of a life sentence--said life without parole sentences are "a death sentence by incarceration. You're trading a slow form of death for a faster one."

"This kind of sentencing is virtually unheard of elsewhere in the world. "Western Europeans regard 10 to 12 years as extremely long term, even for offenders sentenced to life," says James Whitman, author of the book Harsh Justice."

"And among the prisoners with life sentences in the U.S. are 2,380 people who were sentenced to life without parole as "juvenile offenders"--in other words, they were under the age of 18 when the crimes they were accused of were committed--according to Human Rights Watch."

"Of these juvenile offenders, 73 were sentenced to life in prison without parole at the age of 13 or 14 years old, according to research done by the Equal Justice Initiative."

"Antonio Nunez was raised in Los Angles, his life shaped by gang violence. As the Equal Justice Initiative described in its report "Cruel and Unusual," at the age of 14, he got into a car with two older men, one of whom had been kidnapped. A police chase ensued, and gunfire was exchanged. No one was killed; no one was even hurt. But Antonio was sentenced to life in California's San Quentin prison, where he remains today"

California has the mandatory, "three strikes and you're out," sentencing. A third felony offence lands the offender with a 25 year sentence. Since 1994, over 1,000 people have gone to prison for 25 years in California for non-serious crimes.

"Take Santos Reyes. His "crime" was to help his cousin, a Mexican immigrant who was unable to take a drivers' test because he couldn't write English, but needed a license so he could begin working as a roofer with Reyes. For this, Santos was convicted of felony perjury.

Reyes had been convicted of two previous felonies more than a decade before--stealing a radio when he was 17 and a robbery when he was 22. In neither case was anyone harmed. In the years between, he had gotten married, had two children and worked steadily as a roofer. But because the perjury charge was a third felony, he was sentenced to prison under three strikes--where he has spent the last nine years, all for taking a drivers' test for his cousin."

"U.S. policymakers seem determined to march out of step with the rest of the world on the use of harsh prison sentences. In 2006, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution calling on all nations to abolish life without the possibility of parole sentences for youth offenders. The margin was 185 to 1--with the U.S. casting the one and only vote against."

So, the United Nations, by a massive majority, called on all nations to abolish life without parole. Yet, in the USA, juveniles are being sent to prison for the rest of their lives. The USA, with its death sentence gung-ho state of Texas, and its, "three strikes and you're out," state of California sentencing people to 25 years behind bars for non-serious offences, seems to be rather out of step with other developed nations. Even Pakistan has abolished the death penalty. The USA is probably the most powerful and richest country in the world, but in terms of justice it lags way behind most of the civilised world. A country that does not give a 13 year-old the opportunity to change or to be rehabilitated is, in my opinion, in judicial terms, totally uncivilised.

"Everyday that I wake up, it's a pain knowing that I have this sentence, and if these devils get their way, I will have to be here the rest of my days. Knowing this, and being in this situation, just the thought alone will kill you from the inside out. A natural life sentence tells the public that you are a vile and insidious person, and that you possess no rehabilitative potential to reenter society and be a productive citizen. This is a bald-faced lie, and this lie can be brought to an end today."

-- Jamie Jackson, serving a life without parole sentence in Illinois

SOS Madeleine McCann 7/08/08: the McCanns' rented car covered 11,229 kms in four months.

SOS Madeleine McCann 7/08/08

The Renault Scenic was rented by the McCanns on May 27th 2007 and returned to the rental company on September 23rd. Alexander Cameron was also registered as a driver, on May 27th. At the end of August, another driver was included on the list: Michael Terence Wright.

The last contract signed agreed an extension up to September 24th. Before the end of that contract, the McCanns contacted the company because Madeleine's parents wanted to keep the car for longer.

The rental company in its turn, had a contract with Renault Portugal and had to return the car to them. This prevented the extension of the rental to the McCanns. The only option open to the McCanns for keeping the Renault Scenic was to purchase it, but they refused the offer.

On September 23rd, the car was returned to the rental company in Lagos. A tall man, of around 1.80 metres, aged around 60 to 65, with short gray hair, speaking English, took the car back and signed the return slip. The car had covered 11,229 kms, between May 27th and September 23rd.

Payments to the rental company were made with credit cards. Several extensions of the initial contract had been negotiated, with at least two different credit cards. The last extension was done on September 1st up to September 24th.

Duarte Levy & Paulo Reis

La Renault Scenic a été louée par les McCann le 27 mai 2007 et retournée à la société de location le 23 septembre. Alexandre Cameron était également enregistré comme conducteur, le 27 mai. Fin août, un autre conducteur a été inclus dans la liste : Michael Terence Wright.

Le dernier contrat signé accordait une prolongation jusqu'au 24 septembre. Avant la fin de ce contrat, les McCann ont contacté la société de location parce que les parents de Madeleine voulaient garder la voiture plus longtemps.

La société de location avait à son tour un contrat avec Renault Portugal et devait leur rendre la voiture, ce qu’empêchait la prolongation de la location aux McCann. La seule possibilité donnée aux McCann de garder la Renaul Scenic était de la racheter, mais ils ont refusé l’offre.

Le 23 septembre, la voiture a été retournée à la société de location à Lagos. Un homme grand, d’environs 1.80 mètres, âgé de 60 à 65 ans, avec les cheveux courts et gris, parlant anglais, a rapporté la voiture et signé le bon de retour. La voiture avait roulé 1.229** kilomètres, entre le 27 mai et le 23 septembre.

Les paiements à la société de location ont été effectués avec des cartes de crédit. Plusieurs prolongations du contrat de location initial avaient été négociées, avec au moins deux numéros différents de cartes de crédit. La dernière prolongation a été faite le 1er septembre, jusqu'au 24 septembre.

Duarte Levy & Paulo Reis

** I think this is a typo, meant to read 11,229

SOS Madeleine McCann 7/08/08

SOS Madeleine McCann 7/08/08: the Home Office refused to provide details of Gerry McCann's credit cards.

SOS Madeleine McCann 7/08/08

A request sent by the PJ to the British authorities, requesting details of all Gerry McCann's credit card transactions for the six month period, April to October 2007, was considered disproportionate by Frances Kennah, head of the UK Central Authority, a Home Office department.

The PJ requested these details in March 2008, justifying its request with the need to identify if there were unknown motives behind Madeleine's disappearance. Leicestershire police officers had previously informed the Home Office that the Portuguese police had told them that they had decided to request that information after a witness had seen Gerry at a cash machine, speaking on his mobile phone, as Frances Kennah indicates in a letter to the PJ, included in the documents of the investigation.

Considering that the request for information about a period of time that long was disproportionate and not entirely justified by the Portuguese police, the head of the Central Authority responded that the PJ must provide more detailed information about their reasons justifying this period of time, or content themselves with information about the days just before and after Madeleine's disappearance, in which case, Frances Kennah promised to reconsider the request.

Duarte Levy & Paulo Reis

7/08/08

L’affaire McCann : Le Home Office s’est refusé à donner des informations à propos des cartes de crédit de Gerry

Une demande envoyée par la Police Judiciaire (PJ) aux autorités britanniques, demandant les détails de toutes les transactions des cartes de crédit de Gerry McCann pendant une période de six mois, d'avril a octobre 2007, a été considérée disproportionnée par Frances Kennah, le responsable de l'autorité centrale britannique, un département du Home Office (ministère de l’Intérieur).

La PJ a demandé ces détails en mars 2008, justifiant sa demande avec la nécessité d'identifier s'il y avait des motifs inconnus derrière la disparition de Madeleine. Officiers de la Police du Leicestershire avaient précédemment informé le Home Office que les policiers portugais leur ont dit qu'ils avaient décidé de demander cette information après qu’un témoin avait vu Gerry à un distributeur automatique de billets, parlant sur son téléphone portable, comme Frances Kennah l’indique dans une lettre à PJ, incluse dans les documents de l’enquête.

Considérant que la demande d’information à propos d’une période de temps aussi long était disproportionnée et pas entièrement justifiée par la police portugaise, le responsable de l’autorité centrale à répondu que la PJ devrait fournir plus d’informations détaillées à propos des raisons qui justifient cette période de temps, ou se contenter avec l’information des jours juste avant et après la disparition de Madeleine, dans ce cas-ci, Frances Kennah a promis de reconsidérer la demande.

Duarte Levy & Paulo Reis

SOS Madeleine McCann: the Belgian network and the shadow of Toscano

http://sosmaddie.dhblogs.be/

7/08/08

Read also: The McCann case: The Home Office refused to give information about Gerry's credit cards.

The information contained in the email written by the British police officer, John Shord, to the Leicestershire police and sent to the Portuguese authorities, saying that Madeleine McCann had been kidnapped to order by a Belgian Paedophile network is from information circulated by Antonio Toscano, a so-called Spanish journalist who stated he was an expert in cases of abduction.

Toscano, who attributed Madeleine's abduction under orders from a paedophile network to someone called, "El Frances," was interviewed several times by the Portuguese authorities, but his allegations were quickly ruled out after investigation. The Spanish man had even demanded to be seen by Kate and Gerry McCann, who had refused.

"The intelligence suggests that a paedophile network in Belgium put out an order for a young girl, three days before Madeleine was taken," the email puts forward, adding that, "someone connected to this network saw Maddie, took a photo of her and sent it to Belgium (*) The buyer agreed that the girl was suitable and Maddie was taken."

According to a friend of the McCanns, quoted by The Telegraph, on the subject of Belgian paedophile networks, it would also be common knowledge that it is easy to traffic in North Africa.

The information from the British media is all the more surprising when we remember that most of the journalists on that side of the channel received the same copy of the procedure, in which there are all the details of the work carried out by the PJ, in conjunction with the British police, concerning these revelations.

The Dutch witness statement was checked.

A source from the Dutch police, contacted in Amsterdam, confirmed having investigated Anna Stam's witness statement and having ruled out any possibility that the child seen was Madeleine McCann. In perfect English, the police officer maintains that he does not understand the persistence of the media, because, according to him, "the Portuguese authorities requested and obtained, via Interpol, the collaboration of the Dutch police and the conclusions of the investigation carried out in the Netherlands were sent not only to Portugal but also to the United Kingdom.

The Telegraph, quoting the McCanns' spokesperson, Clarence Mitchell, states that the, "revelation," reinforced Kate and Gerry McCann's theory that their daughter would have been abducted by an international network.

Anna Stam, a shopkeeper in Amsterdam, the same town where Kate and Gerry McCann lived before the birth of the twins, is one amongst many Dutch people who contacted the police maintaining that they had seen Madeleine, but, each time, the lead turned out to be false.

Concerning all these witness statements, not only in the Netherlands, but in the rest of the world, the PJ had notably requested support from Interpol. A fax sent from Lyon, European headquarters of the organisation, and which is in the documents that all the journalists have received (including the British) places all the resources of the organisation at the disposal of the Portuguese authorities.

Given that the Dutch witness statement is not a unique case, it is probably necessary to wait for other, "revelations," because Madeleine remains the only missing child who has succeeded in being seen on every continent, sometimes on the same day.

Duarte Levy & Paulo Reis

(*) The Belgians know better than anyone, "the Dutroux effect." : after that case, it became more common to associate the image of the country and of the Belgian people with paedophilia. However, the whole country, independent of questions of politics or logistics, Achilles heel of Belgian society, went onto the streets to demand reforms in the judicial sector and in particular in the police. If there is a country in Europe where efforts have been made to prevent another case like that of Dutroux it is indeed Belgium and it has now become common practice for the country's authorities to offer support and collaboration to its European partners, as was the case with the trial of Michel Fourniret and his wife Monique Olivier.

Le réseau belge et l’ombre de Toscano

Lire aussi: L’affaire McCann : Le Home Office s’est refusé à donner des informations à propos des cartes de crédit de Gerry

L’information contenue dans l’email écrit par John Shord, un officier de police britannique, à la Police du Leicestershire et transmise aux autorités portugaises, donnant compte de que Madeleine McCann aurait été kidnappée sous commande d’un réseau de pédophilie belge, est parti d’informations mises à circuler par António Toscano, un prétendu journaliste espagnol qu’affirmait être spécialiste dans les affaires d’enlèvement.

Toscano, qui attribuait à un dénommé El Frances l’enlèvement de Madeleine sous ordres d’un réseau pédophile, a été entendu à plusieurs reprises par les autorités portugaises, mais ses allégations ont vite été écartées après enquête. L’espagnol avait même demandé à être reçu par Kate et Gerry McCann qui avaient refusé.

"Les services de renseignement suggèrent qu'un réseau de pédophile en Belgique à fait une commande d’une jeune fille trois jours avant que Madeleine soit prise," avance l’email rajoutant que "quelqu'un de relié à ce réseau a vu Maddie, a pris une photo d’elle et l'a envoyée en Belgique (*). L'acheteur a convenu que la fille était appropriée et Maddie a été prise."

Selon un ami des McCann, cité par The Telegraph à propos des réseaux pedophiles en Belgique, le trafic y serait aussi courant qu’il est facile de trafiquer en Afrique du Nord.

L’information des médias britanniques est d’autant plus surprenante quant ont se souvient que la plupart des journalistes outre-Manche ont reçu la même copie du procès, dans laquelle il y a tous les détails du travail mené par la Police judiciaire, conjointement avec la police britannique, à propos de ces révélations.

Témoignage hollandais a été vérifié

Une source de la police hollandaise, contactée à Amsterdam, à confirmée avoir investigué le témoignage d’Anna Stam et avoir écarté toute possibilité de que l’enfant aperçue soit Madeleine McCann. Dans un anglais parfait, l’officier affirme ne pas comprendre l’acharnement des médias, car, selon lui, "les autorités portugaises ont demandé et obtenu, via Interpol, la collaboration de la police hollandaise et les conclusions de l’enquête menée aux Pays-Bas ont été envoyés aussi bien au Portugal qu’au Royaume-Uni."

The Telegraph, citant le porte-parole des McCann, Clarence Mitchell, affirme que la "révélation" viendrait renforcer la théorie de Kate et Gerry McCann de que leur fille aurait été enlevée par un réseau international.

Anna Stam, une vendeuse d’Amsterdam, la même ville où Kate et Gerry ont vécu avant la naissance des jumeaux, est une parmi plus d’une dizaine de néerlandais qui ont contacté la police affirmant avoir aperçu Madeleine, mais, à chaque fois, la piste s’est révélée fausse.

La Police judiciaire avait notamment, à propos de tous ces témoignages, aussi bien aux Pays-Bas que dans le reste du monde, demandé l’appui d’Interpol. Dans un fax envoyé depuis Lyon, siège européen de l’organisation, et qui figure dans les documents que tous les journalistes ont reçus (y inclus les Britanniques), met à disposition des autorités portugaises toute la logistique de l’organisation.

Vu que le témoignage hollandais n’est pas cas unique, il faut probablement s’attendre à d’autres "révélations", car Madeleine reste l’unique enfant disparue qu’a réussi à être aperçue sur tous les continents, parfois le même jour.

Duarte Levy & Paulo Reis

(*) les Belges connaissent mieux que personne "l’effet Dutroux" : après cette affaire, il était devenu courant d’associer l’image du pays et des Belges à la pédophilie. Pourtant, le pays entier, indépendamment des questions politiques ou linguistiques, talon d’achillée de la société belge, était descendu dans la rue pour demander des reformes dans le secteur de la justice et en particulier dans la police. S’il y a bien un pays en Europe où des efforts ont été faits pour éviter une autre affaire semblable à celle de Dutroux c’est bien la Belgique et aujourd’hui c’est devenu monnaye courante les autorités du pays donner appui et collaboration à ses partenaires européens, comme c’était le cas dans le procès de Michel Fourniret et de son épouse Monique Olivier.

7/08/08

http://sosmaddie.dhblogs.be/

Enfants Kidnappés 6/08/08: Haitian children remain the target of kidnapping.

I have great admiration for the Association Enfants Kidnappés which manages the Enfants Kidnappés web site. It is the only site I know of which tries to keep so many missing and abducted children in public awareness. They are now setting up a global network for sending out alerts when a child goes missing. All you need to do is provide your email address and when there is an alert, you will be sent a poster via email, to print out and place wherever you think it would be useful.

Enfants Kidnappés

An article about children in Haiti appeared on the Enfants Kidnappés site on July 29th and I present the translation here, a little late, but it's got to be done!

"les enfants haïtiens demeurent la cible d'enlèvement."

According to the report from MINUSTAH*, children are still victims of kidnapping, murder, sexual violence and child-trafficking. Some are also used in violent demonstrations.

The latest report from the MINUSTAH Child protection unit, covering the period January to July 2008, and published this week, establishes that children continue to be affected by armed violence, despite the general improvement in the climate of security in Haiti.

Kidnapping remains a significant concern. Out of three kidnap victims, more than one is a child. Girls are also becoming the targets of armed groups. In the six month period, 66 minors were abducted, against 80 for the whole of 2007.

Two child victims of kidnapping have been killed. The body of one of them, a minor aged 16, was found tortured and unrecognisable, despite the ransom having been paid to the kidnappers. Many of the abducted girls are also the victims of sexual abuse.

In general, sexual violence against children remains a major concern, even if the statistics from non-governmental organisations working in this field have indicated a lowering in comparison to the previous year.

A significant and alarming increase, is also seen in relation to trafficking of children for sexual exploitation and domestic work in border areas.

Around 750 children were repatriated by the Dominican authorities from January to June 2008. According to the Initernational Organisation for Migration (OIM) 30,000 Haitian minors are victims of child trafficking to the Dominican Republic.

The official information from MINUSTAH tells of the active participation of minors during violent demonstrations last April.

One rioter in three seems to be a minor, according to reports provided by military contingents deployed on the ground. The active participation of children and young people in violent demonstrations occurred at a range of levels, the laying of flaming barricades, getting through the broken windows of private companies, right up to to unsuccessful attempts to invade the presidential palace. (HPN)

Selon un rapport de la Minustah, les enfants sont toujours victimes de kidnapping, de meurtres, de violence sexuelle et de trafic d'enfants. Certains sont également utilisés dans des manifestations violentes.

Le dernier rapport de l'unité de protection de l'enfance de la MINUSTAH, couvrant la période janvier à Juillet 2008, et publié cette semaine, établi que les enfants continuent d'être affectés par la violence armée, en dépit de l'amélioration générale du climat de sécurité en Haïti.

Le kidnapping demeure une préoccupation forte. Sur trois victimes kidnappées, plus d'une est un enfant. Les filles deviennent également la cible principale des groupes armés. En 6 mois 66 mineurs ont été enlevés, contre 80 pour l'entière année 2007.

Deux enfants victimes de kidnapping ont été tués. Le corps de l'un d'entre eux, un mineur de 16 ans a été retrouvé torturé et méconnaissable en dépit de la rançon versée aux agresseurs. Beaucoup de filles séquestrées sont aussi victimes d'abus sexuels.

En général, la violence sexuelle contre les enfants demeure une préoccupation majeure, même si les statistiques des organisations non gouvernementales évoluant dans ce domaine ont indiqué une baisse en comparaison à l'année précédente.

Une montée significative, alarmante, est aussi observée en ce qui a trait au trafic des enfants à des fins d'exploitation sexuelle et de travail domestique dans les zones frontalières.

Environ 750 enfants ont été rapatriés par les autorités dominicaines de janvier à juin 2008. Et selon l'Organisation Internationale pour les Migrations (OIM) 30.000 mineurs haïtiens seraient victimes du trafic d'enfants à destination de la république dominicaine.

Par ailleurs les données officielles de la MINUSTAH relatent la participation active des mineurs lors des manifestations violentes en avril dernier.

Un émeutier sur trois semblait être mineur selon les rapports fournis par les contingents militaires déployés sur le terrain. La participation active des enfants et des jeunes aux manifestations violentes s'est faite à différentes échelles, de la pose de barricades enflammées, en passant pas le bris de vitres d'entreprises privées, jusqu'aux tentatives infructueuses d'envahir le palais présidentiel. (HPN)

Enfants Kidnappés

* MINUSTAH

Mission des Nations Unies pour la Stabilisation en Haiti.

http://www.minustah.org/

Enfants Kidnappés 6/08/08: the British media publish everything and anything on the Madeleine McCann case.

http://www.kidnapping.be/maddie/maddie.html

6/08/08

Everything and anything. What next? A Sunday newspaper magazine dedicating its regular feature to what's in the McCanns' fridge?

Everything and anything!

Since the process has been made public and journalists have had access to the case file, on DVD, the media has gone mad and don't know anymore what to invent to attract attention. In a frenzy of publication, wishing, at all costs, to publish before their neighbours, the British press in its entirety, has sunk to a ridiculous level. The idea is to publish everything and anything but faster than their neighbour. As soon as they have a photo, they publish it without considering the consequences for the families of the people photographed. They add two or three extracts from the report accompanying the photo and there you have it. But it is total disinformation!! For a start, we note that photos included in the case file are categorically banned from publication!!!

On the other hand, that same press makes a big deal of a story about a little girl who looks like Madeleine, seen in a service station, claiming that it was not investigated. Wrong! If they took the trouble to be objective and wanted to honestly inform people, they would publish the whole document, stressing that the lead was followed up and eliminated. They would publish the fact that the PJ suggested that Kate came with them to check if it was Maddie but that she responded, and I quote from the case file, that she, "had other things to do," which really staggered the investigators! That is also in the report, gentlemen of the British press! You only have to read on a few lines! Today, with an obvious interest in manipulating public opinion, the tabloids are talking about the s0-called, "unexplored," Dutch sighting. Clarence Mitchell, the parents' spokesperson, stated: "It is shocking and painful, reading this report, not knowing if it was Madeleine or not."

But it is mentioned in the report. The lead was followed up. The authorities did what was necessary. And Mr Mitchell has the case file, so what is he playing at? Also, Kate said that Madeleine did not like being called Maddie and each time she would say that she wasn't called Maddie but Madeleine. We are entitled to ask why Mr Mitchell seeks to manipulate public opinion? Why is it so vital to pretend not to know or to distort the truth? We could also ask questions about the intellectual integrity of certain journalists, intentionally and knowingly disinforming their readers?

In reality, there's nothing new. Nothing that hasn't been talked about in the world's press in recent months. All of these so-called new leads, said not to have been followed up, have been. They have all been studied. The press is only adding another layer to what is already very well known by everyone. Intellectual integrity is in publishing an article without hiding certain details. The truth is in publishing the information such as it is even if it is not pleasant. In this case, many of the details put a flea in the ear of the investigators, very quickly making the parents suspects in the eyes of the PJ. All these details placed end to end form a trail, this trail essentially leading the investigators to one or several pieces of evidence or to a, "dead end." If we regularly set out the details that led the PJ to suspect the parents, it is with the aim of explaining to you why the parents were suspected. In any case, these details are not evidence, just suspicions, strong assumptions.

It is also establishing a trail. The MP stated that there was no evidence to implicate the parents in Madeleine's disappearance. The MP is right! There is no evidence that is sufficiently solid to support an indictment. Only suspicions remain. Thus, it was completely logical for the parents' status to be lifted, the MP making clear that he believed that Madeleine was dead, but that he did not have evidence of the parents' involvement. Only the acts of child abandonment or neglect could have been maintained but the MP decided to abandon these charges. But don't forget that the investigation is neither over, nor abandoned, nor closed, nor shelved, contrary to what a certain press says. The investigation goes on and will not be closed until Madeleine, alive or not, is found. Also, although the parents are no longer, "arguidos," they have not been exonerated or cleared of anything. The PJ's conviction about the parents has not changed.

The above is translated from an original article on the Enfants Kidnappés web site.


The original article in French by Association Enfants Kidnappés: 6/08/08

Enfants Kidnappés 5/08/08: the McCann parents are less and less credible?

http://www.kidnapping.be/maddie/maddie.html

DNA results

05 août 2008


The parents are less and less credible?

Since the case file has been accessible to the press, all the media are commenting on it. All the Portuguese newspapers are disclosing worrying details, placing in doubt the assertions of the parents. In fact, many details remain difficult to explain. Many details, facts and witness statements, contradict the assertions and statements of the parents and their friends. Of course, the details revealed in the press are not going to be favourable to the McCann family. And for the reason that the investigators built up an opinion of them and that opinion flows through the pages. Be careful, however, not to put words into my mouth: I am not claiming that the PJ directed the investigation according to their beliefs. Quite the opposite! The investigation was conducted as it should be. It is the contradictions, the gross inconsistencies, the lack of cooperation, the parents' inappropriate reactions, which naturally led the investigators to suspect the parents. You know all the worrying details we are talking about:

• Kate going back to her friends, shouting: "They have taken Madeleine," but leaving her children in the apartment where an abduction has just been committed.

• The friends who set about looking for her, but who do not go and look in their own apartments to see if she is there or their children are still there.
  
• The bedroom perfectly tidy and Madeleine's bed undisturbed. (Thanks to the kidnapper for having remade the bed or else Madeleine was not in her bed at the time she disappeared.)
• The fact that British diplomats were advised and that they put pressure on the police investigation. (Kate admitted in a British newspaper, a few days ago, having telephoned the British Prime Minister to ask him to put pressure on the investigation so that, "progress is made."
  
• The contradictory statements about the forced door (which wasn't), the dilapidated and forced shutters. (which were not that either).
  
• The witnesses who didn't see the same things as the parents and their friends while being in the same places at the same time. (299 witnesses were questioned).
  
• The inconsistencies in the statements by the group of friends.
  
• The lack of cooperation from the group.
• The refusal to participate in a reconstruction (Yet crucial in finding out what happened to Madeleine - isn't that the only objective?)
  
• The blood found in the bedroom.
  
• The cadaver odour detected.
• Etc

If these are accurate, it can be understood that the investigators had begun to have serious suspicions. There are many others and sometimes more striking than the few simple examples which I list. The press will present you with others throughout the coming days. The most serious of the published discussions and articles will be about, on the one hand the sniffer dogs of which I give you a brief reminder:


The action of the British dogs, specially trained to detect the odour of corpses and human blood was decisive in Gerry and Kate's being suspected. Given the coincidences faced with the action of the two dogs, who indicated the same places as well as the same objects, the authorities were obliged to admit the possible involvement of the parents in their daughter's disappearance and to designate them, "arguidos," in order to confront them with elements which could lead them to an indictment. The inspectors explain that the dogs gave signs of detecting the odours of human corpse and blood in the places and on the objects that follow:

In the apartment from which Madeleine disappeared (In the bedroom and in the lounge)
In the kichen garden.
In the vehicle rented by the parents 24 days after Maddie's disappearance.
On two items of Kate's clothing.
On Maddie's soft toy which Kate did not put down in the days following the disappearance.

In the apartment of friends of the McCanns, in the village of Praia da Luz and in vehicles used by Robert Murat - the first accused of being suspicious - nothing was detected by the dogs.

On the other hand, articles will focus on the DNA analyses...

The DNA results.

The media war has begun. The British newspapers do not speak the same language as the Portuguese newspapers. Thus, Clarence Mitchell, the parents' spokesperson, states in the British press: "The DNA results were never 100% compatible with Madeleine's DNA. A note of caution had been expressed at the outset. The police were wrong to pursue this line of investigation. The Portuguese judicial system has admitted having no evidence! I can confirm that the PJ stated to Gerry that Madeleine's DNA had been found in the two apartments and in the vehicle, while it is now clear that that is not what the first report from FSS said. You must ask yourself what the police were trying to do in inventing evidence which they don't have and which they cannot have. In these circumstances, it could be asked what is their motivation."

We are going to flatten Mr Mitchell's statements somewhat. From the point of view of a police officer, it happens that the police tell suspects that they hold evidence, which they don't in reality have, in order to crack a suspect; this should not be done any old way. Indeed, it is difficult to tell a suspect, for example, that his fingerprints were found at a crime scene while the suspect knows that he appropriately wore goves throughout his offence and that as a result the police are talking rubbish! You must be quite serious. Putting forward evidence which you don't have must remain plausible, knowing that if the suspect is indeed the guilty party, the police will lose face if they invent evidence that the suspect knows to be false!!

On the other hand, Clarence Mitchell's interpretation of the DNA results invite circumspection. To help us with our thinking, our association called upon an expert on the subject. She is Madame S. Adamis, Legal Expert at the Centre for Human Genetics at the Catholic University of Louvain. (GNEX - UCL)

Association Enfants Kidnappés: Do you know about the LCN technique and is it commonly used?

S.Adamis: LCN (Low Copy Number) is a technique developed by the laboratories of the English Forensic Science Services to analyse samples containing a very small number of molecules of DNA. The basic principle is to increase the number of PCR cycles to increase sensitivity. [Gill, 2000; Whitaker, 2001] This technique has two major drawbacks:

1) It produces unbalanced profiles for one or more markers, with possible disappearance of an allele due to the stochastic* effect.

(*Involving chance or probability)

2) It leads to the detection of one or more alleles in negative controls of unknown origin.

The first drawback leads to obtaining an incomplete profile, partially wrong and not reproducible. This low reliability goes against principles of quality advocated notably by standard ISO 17025 in force in our country.
The second requires necessarily working in special conditions to avoid contamination inherent in the environment and particularly from human DNA present in the dust in the atmosphere or on the surfaces of objects. Given the limitations of this technique, the conclusions produced could easily be attacked or invalidated during a trial. This technique is not routinely used in laboratories for genetic identification in Belgium.

AEK: If in a DNA analysis, 15 out of 19 markers belong to person, "x", can we conclude that it is indeed from that person?
S.A.: If the profile is complete and of quality, and the analysed markers are informative, then without doubt! The result is discriminating. This result is very very reliable. The error is in the region of 1 in a billion! It is almost impossible for it to be otherwise. For a convincing DNA profile, there must be a minimum of 7 base markers. In the case which you present, 15 markers out of 19 does not leave any hanging doubt. This result is completely reliable and usable in court. The error rate of one in a billion is so unlikely that the results are accepted by magistrates without lawyers being able to place them in doubt.

We are going to digress here. We understand even better the attitude of the PJ. Indeed, faced with the inconsistencies we are talking about above, the police officers have doubts. Then the dogs detect traces of blood and cadaver odour. The doubts transform into beliefs. But something is missing. All these elements are not sufficient to face charges in a court. Confirmation is lacking. Scientific confirmation. That confirmation arrives with the first report of analyses which states that 15 out of 19 DNA markers belong to Madeleine. That's all the police need. The evidence is there. Obvious. The first report of the analyses proves the parents' guilt in the eyes of the investigators. This report would be considered as irrefutable proof by, I believe, all the police. From then on the parents were placed, logically, under the specific status of, "arguidos." Of course, an error rate of 1 in a billion is not a 100% profile, in that Clarence Mitchell is right. Then, afterwards, comes a thunderbolt.* A second report from FSS arrives and totally contradicts the first. Also ruining the evidence the police thought they had. According to this report, the harvested samples would have been contaminated, making them very unreliable in the end. Several DNAs would have been mixed, creating the DNA of anyone!

* I took liberties there with the interpretation because that was the best phrase that came to me in the context!


EAK: If we harvest the DNA of three different people, can we recreate the DNA of anyone?

S.A.: If the harvested DNA is mixed with the DNA of three individuals in a balanced way, then effectively we could find the DNA profile of anyone. Mine just like yours. But the mixture must be perfectly balanced, otherwise the rate of reliability becomes very low, going from 1 in a billion to 1 in a thousand or 1 in a 100. It is no longer a question of considering this result as discriminating.

Ok, what happened? LCN unreliable? The samples contaminated during the second analysis but not in the first? The first analysis botched by FSS? There would be a good way of finding out. When two experts contradict each other, a third analysis is carried out in an independent lab. But, alas, following an incident that remains unexplained, the only existing DNA samples were, unforunately, lost or destroyed by the laboratory, which renders impossible a third analysis!

SOS Madeleine McCann: Witnesses have taken apart the McCanns' version about the apartment's shutters.

http://sosmaddie.dhblogs.be/

4/08/08

Témoins ont "démonté" la version des McCann à propos des volets de l’appartement

L’appartement 5A où les McCann ont séjourné jusqu’à la disparition de Madeleine avait été occupé par d’autres Britanniques que l’enquête de la Police Judiciaire à retrouvé, tous ont confirmé le bon état des volets, initialement décrits par des proches de Kate et Gerry comme vieux, usagés et cassés.

Witnesses have, "taken apart," the McCanns' version about the apartment's shutters.

Apartment 5A, where the McCanns were staying until Madeleine's disappearance, had been occupied by other British people, all of whom the PJ found, confirmed the good state of the shutters, initially described by relatives of Kate and Gerry as old, worn and broken.

Parmi ces témoins, Saleigh et Paul Gordon, accompagnés de leurs deux enfants, ont occupé l’appartement 5A avant les McCann, entre le 21 et le 28 avril 2007. Le couple, interrogé à plusieurs reprises par les enquêteurs, affirme que "les portes, les fenêtres et les volets de l’appartement étaient tous en bonnes conditions," soulignant même que vu le bruit fait par les volets des chambres, il serait impossible de les ouvrir ou fermer sans se faire remarquer par les voisins ou les passants.

Les McCann, depuis le premier moment ont prétendu que les volets étaient cassés et que la porte avait été forcée. C’est la version que Kate a donnée à un ami proche, Jon Corner, à qui elle aurait dit "qu’ils ont cassé le volet sur la fenêtre et ont pris ma petite fille."

Amongst these witnesses, Saleigh and Paul Gordon, accompanied by their two children, occupied apartment 5A before the McCanns, between April 21st and 28th 2007. Questioned several times by the investigators, the couple maintain that, "the doors, windows and shutters of the apartment were all in good condition," even stressing that given the noise made by the bedroom shutters, it would be impossible to open or shut them without it being noticed by neighbours or passers-by.

From the beginning, the McCanns have claimed that the shutters were broken and that the door had been forced. That is the version that Kate gave to a close friend, Jon Corner, to whom she reportedly said, "that they have smashed the shutter on the window and taken my little girl."

La même version est d’ailleurs donnée par Gerry McCann au grand-père de Madeleine, Brian Healy : "Gerry m'a dit que quand ils sont retournés, les volets de la fenêtre de la salle étaient cassés (…). La porte était ouverte."(voir McCannfiles)

"La chambre tournée vers le parking était aussi aperçue par d’autres appartements, vu ceci je trouve que si quelqu'un avait essayé ouvrir les volets depuis l’extérieur, quelqu'un l’aurait remarqué," affirme Saleigh Gordon. Son mari, Paul, confirme également que le couple s’est toujours senti en sécurité et que la porte de devant était équipée d’une double serrure, tandis que celle d’arrière se fermait exclusivement depuis l’intérieur de l’appartement.

The same version was, meanwhile, given by Gerry to Madeleine's grandfather, Brian Healy: "Gerry told me that when they got back, the shutters on the bedroom window were smashed (....) The door was open." (See McCannfiles)

"The bedroom, facing the car park, was also overlooked by other apartments. Given that, I find that if someone had tried to open the shutters from the outside, somebody would have noticed," Saleigh Gordon insists. Her husband Paul also confirms that the couple always felt safe and that the front door was equipped with a double lock, while the one at the back only locked from inside the apartment.

L’homme "bizarre" n’en était pas un

C’est également Paul Gordon qui a vu et parlé avec un homme décrit par plusieurs médias britanniques, citant des sources proches des McCann, comme bizarre et suspect. Pourtant, dans ses déclarations à la police, Paul affirme que l’individu n’a jamais "surveillé" les enfants ou l’appartement : "Je décrirais l'homme comme instruit, avec bonne apparence (...). Je me rappelle de lui avec un aspect propre et rasé et avec un léger duvet facial".

The, "strange," man was actually not.

It was also Paul Gordon who saw and spoke to a man described by several British media, quoting sources close to the McCanns, as strange and suspicious. However, in his statements to the police, Paul maintains that the individual never, "watched," the children or the apartment: "I would describe the man as well-educated, of good appearance (...) I remember him as looking tidy and shaved with light downy facial hair. "

"Je me suis dirigé à l'homme qui m’a demandé si je serais intéressé à contribuer avec une donation à un Orphelinat (…). J'ai parlé avec lui et ai remarqué qu'il avait un crachat avec l'identification et qu'il avait ce que m'a semblé un livre de récépissés," confirme Paul Gordon à la police rajoutant qu’il aurait même reçu un récépissé qu’il aurait oublié au Portugal.

Depuis janvier que Paul Gordon a été contacté à plusieurs reprises par Brian Kennedy, Kate et Gerry McCann : "Il y a certains moments ou je me sens comme un pion d’échecs".

"I went over to the man who asked me if I would be interested in making a donation to an orphanage (...) I spoke with him and noticed that he had an indentification badge and that he had what looked to me like a receipt book," Paul Gordon stated to the police, adding that he had even received a receipt which he had left behind in Portugal.

Since January Paul Gordon has been contacted several times by Brian Kennedy, Kate and Gerry McCann: "There are times when I feel like a chess pawn."

"Les McCann ont manipulé des preuves"

La Police Judiciaire (PJ) est convaincue que les McCann ont manipulé des preuves et ont simulé l’enlèvement de leur fille et avance que les parents de Maddie ont modifié la disposition des meubles et des objets de l'appartement. L’information a été publiée ce matin par le quotidien portugais Correio da Manhã, citant l’enquête de la PJ.

"The McCanns manipulated the evidence."

The PJ are convinced that the McCanns manipulated evidence and simulated the abduction of the daughter and put forward that Maddie's parents changed the arrangement of the furniture and some objects in the apartment. The information is published this morning by the Portuguese daily newspaper Correio da Manha, quoting the PJ's investigation.

Selon le quotidien, la coïncidence entre la signalisation d'odeur à cadavre et de sang donné par Eddie et Keela, les deux chiens pisteurs britanniques, derrière le sofa, prouve sans aucun doute que celui-ci a été appuyé au mur après le décès de l'enfant. Les enquêteurs, vu le peu d’indices trouvés sur ce meuble, ont conclu qu’il aurait pu avoir été lavé.

Détail également cité par le Correio da Manhã, cuddle cat, la peluche rose appartenant à Madeleine et que Kate McCann à promené partout, a été placée dans le lit de l'enfant après son décès, vu que, au contraire de la peluche, aucune odeur à cadavre a été signalée sur le lit.

Duarte Levy & Paulo Reis

According to the daily newspaper, the correlation between the alerting to cadaver odour and to blood behind the sofa, by Eddie and Keela, the two British sniffer dogs, proves beyond doubt that this was backed up against the wall after the child's death. The investigators, given the poor evidence found on this piece of furniture, concluded that it may be that it had been washed.

A detail also quoted by Correio da Manha, Cuddle Cat, the pink soft toy belonging to Madeleine and which Kate took everywhere, was placed in the child's bed after her death, given that, in contrast to the soft toy, no cadaver odour was indicated on the bed.

Duarte Levy & Paulo Reis

http://sosmaddie.dhblogs.be/

4/08/08

Enfants Kidnappés: Madeleine McCann - the investigation goes on.

L'enquête se poursuit.

La PJ l'avait annoncé lors de l'archivage du dossier: L'enquête n'est ni clôturée ni abandonnée. Et heureusement que l'enquête n'est pas terminée car Madeleine en vie ou non, n'a pas été retrouvée. La PJ avait déclaré qu'il poursuivait l'enquête loin de l'agitation des médias, dans le calme et la sérénité. Aujourd'hui, alors que le dossier dit "affaire Maddie" est rendu public et que tous les journalistes ont réservé l'accès, il est clairement établi qu'une partie du dossier restera frappé du secret de justice. Il y aurait plusieurs parties concernées. Ce serait les autorités britanniques qui auraient demandé que certaines pièces ne soient pas divulguées au public. Une autre partie l'aurait été à la demande de la PJ pour des documents jugés d'une importance extrême. On peu e déduire que la PJ continue son enquête et ceci expliquerait, comme je l'ai déjà souligné, une certaine agitation au sein de la PJ. Une troisième partie restée sous le secret de justice, le serait suite à une demande privée. Nous y reviendrons plus tard.

The investigation goes on.

The PJ had announced during the archiving of the case file: The investigation is neither closed nor abandoned and fortunately the investigation is not over with because alive or dead, Madeleine has not been found. The PJ had stated that they were continuing the investigation away from the media buzz, in calm and serenity. Today, while the file called the, "Maddie case," is being made public and all the journalists have reserved access, it is clearly established that part of the file will remain stamped secrecy of justice. There would be several parts involved. It would be the British authorities who would have requested that specific documents were not disclosed to the public. Another part would have been at the request of the PJ for documents judged to be extremely important. We can deduce here that the PJ are continuing their investigation and this would explain, as I have already stressed, a certain excitement on the part of the PJ. A third part remains under the secrecy of justice, this being the result of a private request. We will come back to that later.

Stratégie calculée ?

Le fait d'avoir rendu le dossier public sans tirer de conclusions à l'encontre des suspects tout en continuant les investigations est-ce une stratégie voulue ? On peut, évidemment, penser que oui. La PJ, rendant public tous les éléments ou presque mais sans accuser qui que ce soit, occupe tout le monde, les avocats des parents, les parents eux-mêmes, la presse, l'ensemble des médias etc. Pendant que tout le monde se focalise sur le rapport puis sur le dossier, le temps que tout le monde visionne le contenu des DVD (le dossier étant sur DVD), la PJ, quant à elle, peut continuer son enquête dans la sérénité.

A calculated strategy?

Is the fact of having made the case file public without drawing conclusions concerning the suspects while carrying on with the investigation, an intentional strategy? It can obviously be thought, yes. The PJ making all the elements or nearly all, public, but without accusing anyone, occupies everyone, the parents' lawyers, the parents themselves, the press, the whole of the media etc. While everyone is focussed on the report then on the case file, while everyone is watching the contents of the DVDs (the case file is on DVD) as for the PJ, they can get on with their investigation in peace.

Interférence dans l'enquête ?

SOS Maddie révèle que lors de l'audition d'O'Brian comme témoin, il aurait pu d'abord lire les déclarations de sa compagne, Jane Tanner avant de répondre aux questions de l'officier de police en charge. C'est, évidemment, scandaleux! Il est tout à fait inadmissible qu'un policier, qui de surcroît n'est pas un débutant puisqu'il a 25 ans de métier, laisse un témoin lire les déclarations d'un ou plusieurs autres témoins. Il s'agit là, d'une maladresse pour ne pas dire une volonté d'orienter l'audition. C'est une faute professionnelle! L'audition de tout témoin est placée sous le secret professionnel même s'il s'agit de la déclaration de l'épouse du témoin en question. O'Brian, dans une déclaration, reconnaît avoir pris connaissance de l'audition de son épouse pour: "rafraîchir sa mémoire". Quant à Jane Tanner, elle a été interrogée mais son audition à été interrompue par le déclenchement inopiné de l'alarme incendie. Durant les 23 minutes qui suivirent, alors que le commissariat été évacué selon une procédure précise, Jane a pu s'entretenir avec l'avocat d'un des suspects et un des suspect en personne de l'affaire en question. Le tout au sein du commissariat. Même s'il ne s'agit pas d'un témoin à charge, on peu se poser des questions quant à l'aspect déontologique de la procédure. Notons que, malgré tout, Jane avait et a toujours des contacts avec certains suspects du moment et qu'ils pouvaient discuter librement de l'affaire bien avant d'être auditionné.

Interference with the investigation?

SOS Maddie reveals that during O'Brien's interview as a witness, he would first have been able to read the statements of his partner, Jane Tanner, before responding to the questions of the police officer in charge. This is obviously scandelous! It is totally unacceptable that a police officer, who moreover is not a beginner, since he has 25 years in the job, lets a witness read the statements of one or several other witnesses. It is a blunder if not a desire to direct the hearing. It is a professonal mistake! The hearing of every witness is placed under professioanl confidentiality even if the statement is that of the spouse of the witness in question. O'Brien, in a statement, admits gaining knowledge of his wife's hearing to, "refresh his memory." As for Jane Tanner, she was interviewed but her hearing was interrupted by the unexpected setting off of the fire alarm. During the 23 minutes which followed, while the police station was evacuated according to clear procedure, Jane was able to have a discussion with the lawyer for one of the suspects and with one of the suspects in the case in question, in person. All this at the police station. Even if it is not a witness for the prosecution, we may ask questions about the ethical aspects of the procedure. We note that, in spite of everything, Jane had always had contact with certain suspects at the time and that they were able to freely discuss the case well before being interviewed.

Brian Kennedy, le milliardaire qui finance l'équipe d'avocat des parents et les appointements de Clarence Mitchell, entre autre, a visité plusieurs témoins impliqué dans l'enquête sur la disparition de Madeleine. On est en droit de e demander pourquoi un particulier, fut-il milliardaire, peut se permettre d'interférer dans une enquête de police ? Les témoins les moins favorables aux McCann auraient été particulièrement visités. La question qui vient immédiatement à l'esprit est: pourquoi ? Dans quel but ? Certes Brian Kennedy n'est pas impliqué dans l'enquête en cours au Portugal. Il n'est même pas témoin. Les autorités britanniques auraient du, au minimum dans un souci déontologique, mais surtout dans un souci d'objectivité, interroger Brian Kennedy sur ses motivations à interférer dans une enquête concernant une fillette de 4 ans ? Jusqu'ici, les autorités britanniques restent silencieuses à ce sujet. Or les autorités portugaise ont demandé à leurs homologues britanniques des précisions mais là aussi sans réponse du R-U.

Brian Kennedy, the millionaire who finances the parents' team of lawyers and the employment of Clarence Mitchell, and others, visited several witnesses involved in the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance. We are entitled to ask why an individual, millionaire he may be, is allowed to interfere in a police investigation? Especially the witnesses least favourable to the McCanns would have been visited. The question that comes immediately to mind is: why? To what end? Certainly Brian Kenedy is not implicated in the ongoing investigation in Portugal. He is not even a witness. The British authorities, at least as an ethical issue, but above all as an issue of of objectivity, should have questioned Brian Kennedy about his motives for interfering in an investigation concerning a little four year-old girl? Until now, the British authorities have been silent on this subject. Well, the Portuguese authorities asked their British counterparts for details but there again with no response from the UK.

Les McCann auraient trafiqué les preuves ?

Dans son édition d'aujourd'hui, le Correio da Manha affirme que la PJ n'a pas de doutes quant au fait que les parents de Madeleine ont modifié la disposition des meubles et de divers objet de l'appartement d'où Maddie a disparu. Si c'est vrai, et il faut voir sur quoi ce base le CdM, il s'agit là d'un maquillage des lieux d'une scène d'un crime afin de détourner les soupçons et d'effacer les preuves. Notons que la PJ a toujours considéré comme étrange le fait que le lit de Madeleine n'ait pas été défait comme si la petite n'y avait pas dormi. Il est difficile de croire qu'un ravisseur ait pris soin de refaire parfaitement le lit de Madeleine après l'avoir enlevée ? Maintenant gageons que le dossier en DVD (que notre association va pouvoir consulter) expliquera ces détails troublants.

The McCanns tampered with evidence?

In today's edition, Correio da Manha states that the PJ have no doubts about the fact that Madeleine's parents changed the position of furniture and various objects in the apartment from which Madeleine went missing. If this is true, and we must see what CdM is basing this on, there is here tampering with areas of a crime scene in order to divert suspicion and to wipe out the evidence. We note that the PJ have always considered strange the fact that Madeleine's bed had not been disturbed as if the little girl had not slept there. It is difficult to believe that a kidnapper had taken care to remake Madeleine's bed perfectly after having abducted her? We are now betting that the case file on DVD (that our association will be able to look at) will explain these worrying details.

SOS Madeleine McCann: Russell O'Brien was allowed to refer to Jane Tanner's statements before he was questioned.

SOS Madeleine McCann 4/08/08

The Maddie investigation: O'Brien was questioned after having referred to Tanner's statements.

At the time of his interview, in April 2008, Russell James O'Brien was able to refer to the report of his partner Jane Tanner's statements in order to respond to questions from Andrew Gierc, a Leicestershire police officer, about the events that surrounded Madeleine McCann's disappearance.

The access of one witness to the statements of another, even when it is the same couple, is worrying and outside the norm, above all in the course of an investigation of the importance of the Madeleine McCann case. It is also judged by experts from several European police forces, consulted by SMM, as more than a simple professional error: "this can direct the witness or even worse, allow him to answer questions in a way that protects his position in the investigation," states an officer of the French gendarmerie, stressing, "that it is an error capable of compromising an entire investigation and that no professional worthy of that name would make it....The only explanation that remains is the possibility that the investigator wanted to confuse the witness for a specific reason."

"I was given the opportunity to refresh my memory about the report made by Jane Tanner (my wife) and I was allowed to see these documents. That was done in the presence of DC 1578 Gierc," O'Brien admits.

O'Brien was interviewed twice, on April 8th and 10th 2008, but strangely, his his first interview would not have been recorded on video, because, according to the British police, there was a, "technical fault." However, it now looks like the video, which was never sent to Portugal, exists but would not be attached to the report of the April 8th interview.

Russell O'Brien's second interview by police officer Andrew Gierc, was indeed recorded on video, to which we have had access.

All the other, "Tapas 7," were also interviewed: Payne was questioned for 259 minutes by police officer I. Messiah, Diane Webster for 151 minutes by police officer Fergusson, Fiona Payne for 277 minutes by police officer Messiah, Matthew Oldfield for 157 minutes and Rachael Mariamma Jean Mampilly, by police officer Andrew Gierc for 236 minutes.

Jane Tanner was interviewed for 279 minutes by police officer Fergusson, an interview with seven interruptions, the first also very hectic after only 18 minutes when the fire alarm went off.

196 witnesses and 3 arguidos.

At the time when the Portuguese Public Minister decided to place the investigation into Madeleine's disappearance on hold pending further evidence, there was a total of 196 witnesses, including the McCanns' seven friends, and three arguidos, registered in the process.

Several witnesses, who made themselves known to the British authorities, have remained unknown to the Portuguese investigators, for a reason yet to be determined. Brian Kennedy, the millionaire who would be financing Clarence Mitchell and the McCanns' team of lawyers, has even visited several of the investigation's witnesses, in particular those who were less favourable to the couple.

Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, Kate Marie Healy, (also addressed as Kate McCann) and Gerald Patrick McCann were the three arguidos.

Amongst the witnesses, there are a few names already known to the general public. The, "nannies," Amy Ellen Tierney, Catriona Treasa Sisile Baker, Charlotte Elizabeth alice Pennington, Emma Louise Wilding, Jacqueline Mary Williams, Kirsty Louise Maryen, Lyndsay Jayne Johnson, Lynne Rhiannon Fretter, Sarah Elizabeth Williamson, Sinead Maria Vine, Stacey Portz, Susan Bernadette Owen and Pauline Frances McCann.

The tennis coaches, Daniel James Stuk and Georgina Louise Jackson.

George Robin Crosland (Ocean Club manager) George William James, Jennifer Anne Murat, Jeremy Wilkins, John Elliot Hill, Michaela Walazuch, Pamela Isobel Fenn, Robert James Queriol Eveleigh Murat, Sergey Malinka (Murat's friend) José Manuel Conceição Pacheco, Susan Hubard and Svetlana Malinka.

The “Tapas 9”: David Anthony Payne, Dianne Webster, Fiona Elaine Payne, Gerald Patrick McCann, Jane Michelle Tanner, Kate Marie Healy, Rachael Mariamma Jean Mampilly, Russel James O´Brien and Matthew Oldfield.

http://sosmaddie.dhblogs.be/

4/08/08