Madeleine McCann: The Third Summer of Maddy
IT’S the media’s Third Summer of Madeleine McCann - and the current subject is Raymond Hewlett…
Mirror (front page): “TRACE HIS CALLS.”
Ryan Parry and Stephen Moyes are in Aachen, Germany, where Raymond Hewlett is undergoing treatment for throat cancer.
Madeleine McCann cops ask couple who raised alarm about paedophile Ray Hewlett if they have his mobile number
Well, do you have the private phone number of the creepy man? And why did he give it to you?
The couple who raised the alarm about paedophile Ray Hewlett told yesterday how detectives who interviewed them asked: “Do you still have his mobile number.”
Alan and Cindy Thompson were questioned for three hours at the weekend by officers from Leicestershire Police’s Madeleine McCann task force.
Cindy, who handed over the foreign number, said yesterday: “The detective who interviewed me asked for Ray’s number. He didn’t say what they’ll do with it, I just hope it helps in some way.”
Phone records are useful:
The records will show which mobile phone masts Hewlett’s phone connected to on specific dates. The information may help officers track Hewlett’s movements the night Madeleine went missing and over the following days.
The Sun: “DNA test on perv Maddie suspect”
WANTED paedophile Raymond Hewlett is to undergo a DNA test to establish whether he was involved in the kidnapping of Madeleine McCann.
The police swab test just about anyone. What’s one more?
The 64-year-old convicted child rapist was living near the Algarve resort of Praia da Luz when Maddie vanished two years ago. Detectives working for Maddie’s parents Kate and Gerry are due to arrive today in Aachen, Germany, where cancer-stricken Hewlett is in hospital.
The ex-cops have no formal powers to make Hewlett co-operate, and are relying on him talking voluntarily.
Throat-cancer patient made to talk! And that’s right – private citizens want to swab a man, whose innocent must be presumed.
But a spokesman for Aachen police last night confirmed the public prosecutor will make the decision to give Hewlett a DNA test in the next few days.
Indeed. If he is a genuine suspect, the police can deal with him. And if he’s in hospital - which he is - surely he has given blood and been subject to all manner of tests?
Kate and Gerry’s official spokesman Clarence Mitchell tells us:
“Mr Hewlett has denied any involvement in Madeleine’s abduction. Our investigators hope he will co-operate by giving them whatever information is needed so they can eliminate him from the investigation. It’s clear the man is ill and it is clear he has information that our investigators need.”
Is it clear that he has information - really? Or is it just a suspicion, a hunch, a feeling?
West Yorkshire police want to quiz Hewlett over a 1975 sex attack and have asked German authorities for help. The pervert is also wanted for questioning over the murder of Lesley Molseed, 11, in the same year in Rochdale, Lancs.
He did not kill Lesley Molseed. So why mention it? Hewlett has form, having raped a 12-year-old girl and held a gun to a teenager’s head. But what evidence linking him to Our Maddie?
Manchester Evening News: More from Clarence Mitchell:
“He denies he has anything to do with Madeleine’s abduction. If that’s the case, it’s very much in his interests that he speaks to Kate and Gerry’s investigators to help them eliminate him.
Why is it in Hewlett’s interests to speak with the McCanns’ detectives?
“However, until they speak to him and have been able to clarify his movements around the time of Madeleine’s abduction then he will remain one lead amongst several that the investigators are currently pursuing.”
Point the finger, tell the media and make people prove their innocence. And this is justice how?
Hewlett’s German common-law wife, Mariana Schmuecker, said she was standing by him but refused to discuss the case.
She said: “My husband has nothing to do with little Madeleine. He is innocent.”
Ms Schmuecker refused to say where she and Hewlett were on May 3, 2007, when Madeleine McCann vanished from an apartment at the Ocean Club complex in Portugal’s Algarve.
And the mother-of-six has demanded protection from police as news of Hewlett’s sordid past has begun to emerge.
She shouted: “If anyone comes near me or my children I am going to call the police.”
Paedo! Is harrassing mum-of-six fair?
A youth club worker said: “No one really knows the family. They have moved into the flat recently and they do not talk.
“There are many children in the area.
“There is a kindergarten across the road, a play ground behind the block and a youth club around the corner.”
Daily Mail: “Monster boasted he knew Maddie resort Praia da Luz ‘very well’2
Daily Mirror: “Paedo Raymond Hewlett admits visiting Madeleine holiday flats”
Paedo’s shock confession to holiday couple: ‘I know Madeleine resort very well..I’ve parked near flat several times.’
We don’t hear when Hewlett parked near flats in a holiday resort. Only that he has done.
And then Simon Wright digs up this gem:
And last night a man who shared a Morocco campsite with Hewlett and his family for three months described how the drifter was obsessed with the missing youngster.
Obsessed – like the, er, Daily Mirror is?
Speaking exclusively to the Sunday Mirror, former Scots Guard Peter Verran, 46, revealed how Hewlett, his German wife Mariana, 33, and their six children arrived at the campsite where he was holidaying in Chefchaaouen in a battered Dodge truck. It was May 2007 – shortly after Madeleine’s disappearance…
“He seemed like an old hippy traveller who had dropped out,” said Peter, who runs an internet business selling antiques and collectibles from his home in Fowey, Cornwall.
Such are the facts.
“We got talking at the toilet block. He brought Madeleine up straight away. He said his three-year-old daughter looked like her. He was worried that because there had been reports that Madeleine may have been spirited away to Morocco, people might think his child was her. Then he suddenly said, ‘Madeleine’s not in Morocco’.”
Man talks about Our Maddie!
“I asked him what he meant and he said he knew Praia Da Luz really well. He knew the Ocean Club complex where the McCanns had been staying. He said he’d been there many times and had often parked his van close to the apartment.
“He said he knew the layout of the place, the flat and the restaurant where the McCanns and their friends had been eating when Maddie disappeared. He had a lot of detail about the layout. He said there was no way that the child could be taken without the parents seeing. He said they were lying.”
So Hewlett’s not only a suspect but also an ex-pat who knows the scene well? And he has a theory. And with form he might know about the paedo scene?
Madeleine McCann is missing and the media is gearing up for a Summer of Maddie…
Madeleine McCann: Three New British Suspects
Madeleine McCann: McCanns Want Hewlett To Co-operate
Pictures Of All The Madeleine McCann Suspects
Madeleine McCann: The Story In Pictures
Madeleine McCann: Murat ‘Cleared’, A Volvo And Urs Hans Von Aesch
Posted: 25th, May 2009 | In: Key Posts, Madeleine McCann, Media Comments (32) | Follow the Comments on our RSS feed: RSS 2.0 | TrackBack | Permalink
Comments
- yampster on Virginia Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki Hails The ‘Hero’ Nidal Hasan’s Lap-Dances For Allah
- madhatter13 on Virginia Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki Hails The ‘Hero’ Nidal Hasan’s Lap-Dances For Allah
- yampster on Virginia Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki Hails The ‘Hero’ Nidal Hasan’s Lap-Dances For Allah
- madhatter13 on Virginia Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki Hails The ‘Hero’ Nidal Hasan’s Lap-Dances For Allah
- madhatter13 on Virginia Imam Anwar Al-Awlaki Hails The ‘Hero’ Nidal Hasan’s Lap-Dances For Allah
May 28th, 2009 at 3:36 am
We know what DIDN’T happen in the apartment–a murder or abduction. No evidence of anything. Like the “Suspect Of The Month” thing the press is doing concerning Maddie–they’re sharkish yet they dumbfound me. If they don’t even have proof that this guy had ANYTHING to do with her “abduction” or “murder” then why do they call him a Monster in the headlines RIGHT OFF THE BAT?!
Feeding frenzy or rabidity?
Gotta love the rag mags.
May 26th, 2009 at 8:37 am
It can only confirm NO ONE knows what went on in Appt 5A….and isn’t that the other end anyway?
Bit like viewing an accident from a 1/4 of a mile away up the motorway
May 26th, 2009 at 4:05 am
I’m with Stig - view the apartment over the rim of a misty red wine glass at 50 meters ..while gassin’ with your pals..i think not..
as for Hewlett- lets resurrect Jack the Nipper Ripper? as well..it’s gonna be a long summer..or the media could actually start to indulge in some serious and honest investigative journalism for a change…
May 25th, 2009 at 11:08 pm
Abe Z
There was some sort of pig farmer as well if i remember rightly. Didn’t he chase the press off his land with a rusty old musket or something like that. Can’t fault his attitude
May 25th, 2009 at 10:25 pm
View of the apartment from the Tapas Bar at night:
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/New_view_from_Tappas_bar.jpg
May 25th, 2009 at 7:32 pm
@
22 BlackBob says:
May 25th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Distraction.
@
I dunno, Blackbob, this is the first time since Murat that someone outside the family/friends has been named as “of interest” - for much of the time we’ve been served up with nameless and shadowy individuals such as Bundleman, Cooperman, Pimpleman etc who let’s face it could’ve been anybody.
My intincts tell me this is leading somewhere.
May 25th, 2009 at 7:22 pm
The latest witch didn’t need the 2 million Euro reward then ? neither do the impoverished local villagers !
May 25th, 2009 at 6:44 pm
Hi Cheryl,
I DID say it was immoral and lying……I’ll add that it’s unethical, unprofessional and I agree that cops who think themselves above the law and lie to protect one another do give off that putrid smell. And one has has to wonder what else they would lie about. Once integrity is gone, it’s difficult to be seen as honest again.
However, I have to agree with Clive that to give false evidence that would land someone with a long jail sentence would be even worse.
NOT that the Mcs have done any such thing, of course. Nor do I believe for one moment that they would. I remember GM answering a journalist pretty sharply just after Murat had been made arguido. The journalist asked him what he thought about it. GM answered that NOBODY should be seen as guilty until convicted in a court of law and he hoped everybody would remember that. And this was right at the beginning when he must have been hoping that something positive would come up. He still gave Murat, totally correctly, the presumption of innocence. I have no reason whatsoever to think the Mcs would falsify evidence in a court in order either to protect OR to convict someone else. Amaral has just been found guilty of doing the former.
Please don’t think I excuse perjury, EVER, for whatever reason. Just agreeing with Clive that there is a scale. Stealing a child is worse than stealing a car, for example.
Out with friends soon. Have a nice day/evening!
May 25th, 2009 at 6:36 pm
Moderator
I have said nothing contentious in my last comment.
Can you please advise why it is being moderated ?
Thanks
Moderator - Glitch in system
May 25th, 2009 at 6:33 pm
Cheryl
Let’s not run away with ourselves. Amaral demonstrated misplaced loyalty
and received a suspended sentence. That is how seriously it was interpreted
by the court, I would suggest.
Is it not also true that they guys he was trying to cover were found not guilty ?
I agree police corruption and brutality is a seriously bad thing but lets get
Amaral’s action in perspective.
May 25th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
Distraction.
May 25th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
Maria, I cannot agree with you for a second with your comment…” but I agree that it is more forgivable to protect colleagues who have beaten up a suspect than it would be to frame an innocent person who could go to jail.” It is NEVER acceptable under any circumstances for Police to cover up another’s possible crime in breaking the law anymore than it is forgiveable or accepable for their attempts to frame an innocent person. They take an oath to uphold the laws and protect the public and that is a high standard they are expected to adhere to and do otherwise is unacceptable under any circumstances.
That is exactly why the U.S.has the Miranda Act - to protect suspects from police brutality and lies which took place way too often until the Supreme Court ruled NO MORE. It still takes place, when they think they can get away with it, and there are policemen sitting in jail for their brutality against suspects and their ‘buddies’ were sitting right in there with them for covering up and lying for them.
Here is a link to a horrible case that took place in NY years ago of police brutality and lies to cover it up.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/04/nyregion/04schwarz.html?_r=1
(More and more over here with cameras in our cell phones the public are filming police in public beating up suspects stopped and TV news showing the police brutality for all to see.)
To me there is nothing more putrid smelling than any cop who thinks they are above the law.
May 25th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Nice chatting anyway, Clive! And Cheryl, of course. Chatted in between housework, so especially good!
And, as I’ve always said, it’s all only opinion, and any opinion can be wrong. I keep a more open mind than you might think. I am only expressing a view based on what I see and read. Fascinating case, though.
May 25th, 2009 at 5:31 pm
Clive
It’s immoral and it’s lying, but I agree that it is more forgivable to protect colleagues who have beaten up a suspect than it would be to frame an innocent person who could go to jail. But this is not what the McCanns have done. From what I’ve read, I guess they think Hewlett may know about paedophile contacts in the area and maybe that is the info they want from him. They have not, before a court, falsified evidence, as Amaral is convicted of doing. No comparison.
Amaral will have to show that he still genuinely believes the Mcs are guilty of a crime/crimes despite the fact that the lengthy Portuguese investigation found otherwise. He will also have to provide some justification for making those beliefs public in the way he is doing, again, despite the official police findings. I don’t know Portuguese law. He may be able to do this. It depends exactly what he has to prove. But, if there’s no evidence for abduction, there certainly isn’t any for Madeleine’s body having been stuffed in the wardrobe…
As for being in a hole… if you claim abduction and there is no evidence, you thank Heaven and keep quiet once you’ve been cleared of any crime, and keep a low profile, I’d have thought! Not that I’ve ever been in such a situation!
Cheryl
I’ve seen the programme. Impressive.
Clive
The investigators had access to the files without agreeing to any terms at all, except with the Mcs. The McCanns have HAD the files for months. Totally free access. For obvious professional reasons, to protect their reputations, the investigators will have insisted on these terms. And the Mcs were perfectly happy, no doubt, because I assume they know that no such evidence will be found. Do you think they are totally mad? They would not risk being found guilty of anything now……not when they’ve been cleared for so long and nobody terribly significant was bothering them any more. Even Amaral would probably have gone away eventually, with his fat wad of cash, conviction or no conviction, but I can understand their wanting to put an end to it, for the twins’ sake. Should think they themselves are long past caring what anybody says about them.
Moderator - Amaral’s colleagues have been cleared of beating up Senhora Cipriano
May 25th, 2009 at 4:38 pm
The only way the McCann investigators would get access to the files would be to agree to such terms. I do not think for one minute that the McCanns suggested
this should be the case.
May 25th, 2009 at 4:02 pm
Maria, I’m trying to find the video I watched where the two detectives now handling the investigation for the McCanns said outright and upfront that they made it plain and in writing to the McCanns if they found any evidence that pointed blame on the McCanns it would be turned over to the proper officials and the McCanns agreed to that. Thus, for anyone to think and/or still suggest the McCanns are in any way involved in a cover up of the daughter’s disappearance are blooming idiots, imo! These parents are desperate to find their daughter as ALL parents of missing children were or are until they get closure one way or the other, even if means for a lifetime of searching.
It has been made quite plain, for those who don’t read, that Hewlett is just one of many leads these Detectives are following up on. Leads that were either not closely followed up on or just put away in the files to gather dust. These two men are doing a yoeman’s job that should have been done from the very beginning!
It could be just a coincidence Hewlett lived not far away from the Resort; it could be just a coincidence he went to that place several times, by his own admission; it could be just a coincidence he talked about the case a lot, if one wants to put total credence in what people who knew him say - what we do we have? THREE coincidences - one you can overlook one coincidence, you can overlook two but THREE? I’d say overlooking three coincidences is stretching it, time to at least talk to that depraved man, if for no other reason than to rule him out, which is one of the reasons the Detectives want to talk to him.
That paying of their mortgage with the Funds was brought out early on and I thought settled.
Interesting, this is all about finding Maddie and leads are now being followed up on, why are people insisting on drudging up old bad press on the parents at a time like this? Many are still obsessed with making sure the parents stay crucified with ugly insinuations and not letting go of the past. You ‘wannabe sleuths’ had your chance for 2 years and did a laughable job in failure. Let the true experts do their job and just maybe this case will come to a close
May 25th, 2009 at 3:23 pm
In your second last post you have asked and answered so no need to respond.
If I had made a claim of abduction and there was no evidence at all to support this,
I would consider I was in a hole.
Despite Stig’s comments, my own view is that Amaral can not lose.
His perjury is a black mark but this was done to support his colleagues as opposed to trying to frame a suspect - more forgiveable, in my view.
Bring it on and end the speculation.
May 25th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Clive
BTW, what “hole” were they in?
Nobody has ever charged them with anything. The Portuguese official investigation effectively cleared them of any suspicion. It’s true that Amaral is accusing them but so what? (a) He’s just been convicted of perjury so is anyone likely to believe him? (b) They’re suing him and it does SEEM impossible for them to lose. See Stig’s posts on this!
So…..what hole?!
May 25th, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Clive
OK. But covering up what, exactly? They have NEVER denied leaving the children. They never, for example, concocted a story to hide the fact that they had done the same thing every evening.
They even added, which they had absolutely no need to do, that Madeleine had asked them if they had heard her and Sean crying the previous night. Since this could only show them in an even worse light, it would appear that their only reason for saying it was, presumably, to alert the police to the possibility of someone having been hanging around then, in case any witnesses came forward to say they’d seen anything the previous night.
Where’s the cover-up?
And what they are doing now only draws further attention to the “neglect”.
If there was a fatal accident to Madeleine and they covered THAT up and hid her body in the wardrobe or on the beach (Amaral’s two suggestions) for later disposal from their car hired a month later (Amaral again), then that WOULD be a crime, although you may not call it “heinous”?? It would also involve HUGE wasting of police time AND obtaining money fraudulently. Two further crimes. They have not, of course, been charged with any crime at all.
You are right that they used a tiny amount of the Fund (relatively) to pay two mortgage installments when they were still in Portugal. I always thought it wrong, though not illegal. It’s none of my business, but they should, in my personal view, have got an overdraft for this, or family members should have helped them. After all, a consultant cardiologist is hardly going to be short of cash, for ordinary expenses! It was reported at the time that they had used up their savings staying on for so long in Portugal. From the legal point of view, they could have used the Fund for ALL their living/accommodation expenses while in Portugal, because staying there constituted helping the police etc. and, as such, was part of the search for Madeleine. BUT they didn’t do this. They used their own money until it ran out and then, wrongly, in my view, paid two mortgage installments from the Fund.
(This is all according to media reports, but then, so is the original “fact” that they paid two installments out of the Fund. Who knows bar the auditors?)
If it’s true, I wonder if they ever paid it back?
May 25th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Another year another suspect.How convenient. Kerching.
May 25th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
I have never suspected the McCanns of a heinous crime, only neglect and
the possibility of a cover up.
Do not really wish to go backwards, but is it not accepted that part of the fund was used towards mortgage payment ?
When you are in a hole, keep digging - I think this is what applies to the good doctors
May 25th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
June
Agree about media. Rag rubbish. I’d guess little useful will come of it in terms of finding Madeleine, but I do hope I’m wrong.
May 25th, 2009 at 12:05 pm
It’s unlikely, in my view, that they would want the limelight if they thought it would uncover a heinous crime they’d committed in relation to their child. They would lose their other children, their careers, the respect of their families and friends….and go to prison. All for a couple of TV appearances? Doubt it.
The Fund is used to pay expenses related to finding Madeleine. It has to be audited annually according to the correct legal procedures for funds of the category to which it belongs.
If they were using the money for personal gain, of course, that would fraud, which is a crime. Is that what you are implying?
I don’t believe the Mcs have ever been charged with fraud, much less convicted. Correct me if I’m wrong. Mods?
If they wish to generate funds to continue their search for Madeleine, or for what happened to her, that is a different matter, and perfectly legal. People are not obliged to donate.
Moderator - No, they haven’t and Clive didn’t suggest they had either
May 25th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Yampster, it was really rhetoric, but as you say the sleuths or others can’t have it both ways.
Best to wait til the Media hyperbole dies down Maria
May 25th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Possibly their enjoyment of being in the limelight plus opportunity to
generate more funds could do sway them. Maria
May 25th, 2009 at 10:38 am
PeterMac
If it’s true that they could see the apartment clearly, then maybe they were less negligent than has been made out?
But who is lying? We don’t know.
Just because the rags say somebody said Hewlett said they were lying….doesn’t make it true…either that they were lying, or that somebody said he said they were lying, or that he said they were lying, or, if he did, that he wasn’t lying when he said they were lying.
If you see what I mean!
As usual, we know nothing. BUT, if they were guilty (other than leaving the kids in the first place), I doubt if the Mcs would be keen for their investigators to probe. Indeed, if they were guilty, the Mcs could have let sleeping dogs lie (sorry!) long ago and kept a low profile at the second anniversary instead of renewing the publicity. They don’t seem in the least bit worried about turning any stone under which evidence might be found which might show what happened to Madeleine.
May 25th, 2009 at 10:22 am
June, just pointing out that the sleuths can’t have it both ways. I don’t know which is tue
May 25th, 2009 at 10:06 am
Yampster,,
if they could see, why didn’t they act?
May 25th, 2009 at 9:53 am
The next thing you will hear is that he has confessed just before he died! At least he is willing to take a lie detector test. Makes you wonder why other people aren’t!
May 25th, 2009 at 9:15 am
Ever more interesting but I do not see this route ever finding Madeleine…-alive.
May 25th, 2009 at 9:15 am
“He said he knew the layout of the place, the flat and the restaurant where the McCanns and their friends had been eating when Maddie disappeared. He had a lot of detail about the layout. He said there was no way that the child could be taken without the parents seeing. He said they were lying.”
So then. The apartment was easily seen from the restaurant? So, no one could have taken the child without them seeing? It seems that even the charge of neglect goes out of the window if you’ll excuse the expression. The McCanns were in a position to oversee their apartment as they always said they were. According to Hewlett that is. What an unlikely ally he is turning out to be