UK police chief hits back at Portuguese detective’s claims
8 November 2009 | Posted by astro Leave a Comment
The head of Leicestershire Police has rejected claims from a former Portuguese detective that his officers withheld a witness statement from the Madeleine McCann inquiry.

Chris Eyre, the Temporary Chief Constable, said “I can assure you that at no time were statements withheld and not passed on.”

Goncalo Amaral, the Algarve detective who was removed the inquiry early on, made his claim in a book, which is now banned.

Mr Eyre responded after Freedom of Information requests were submitted by the Sunday Express.

A team of Leicestershire family officers went to Portugal on 5 May 2007 to support the McCanns.

It has also emerged that the Foreign Office has withheld details about the investigation so as not to damage relations between Britain and Portugal.

An individual submitted Freedom of Information requests to get details of negotiations by John Buck, Britain’s former ambassador to Portugal.

The then Information Commissioner Richard Thomas refused in case it caused Portugal to lose trust in Britain’s discretion.

in: Sunday Express, 08.11.2009, paper edition only

Sandra: Hello Kate, Hi Gerry. You have called us here, or invited us here to show these two new pictures of how Madeleine might look like now at the age of six and also to watch a video, a new appeal video, but you have been recently together in Lisbon. Have you truely felt that the portuguese public opinion is still with you?

Gerry: I think obviously there has been a lot written that is very negative, and ehm it is inevitable that given so much…, so much was written negative about us, that some people felt that we were involved, that we do feel now, that legal action has been taken and the judicial process has seen that there is no evidence to support what has been written.

Sandra: You are talking about Goncalo Amaral’s book?

Gerry: Yeah, but also with the publication of the file in the first place erm an initial process of the criminal erm file and regarding Madeleine’s disappearance. You know there is no evidence that we were involved and subsequently the action we have taken recently I think that people are now prepared to continue the search for Madeleine and that is why we are here today asking people to help us trying to get this very important message…

Sandra: But how can you explain that Goncalo Amaral has sold over 175.000 copies defending that you played the keyrole in Madeleine’s disappearance?

Kate: I mean I think it’s important to remember Sandra, the only victim in all of this is Madeleine erm and that is obviously why we are here today really, we are trying to, we are trying to (sigh) reach that person who knows something, and there is somebody who knows something, not the person who has taken Madeleine, but the person on the periphery, and that might just be erm a colleague of the person, a neighbour, a fami…, you know this person, the abductor, has got a mother, a brother, a cousin, a part of family, so that…

Sandra: Do you believe that the public opinion in Portugal right now after reading the book of Goncalo Amaral erm still can support you? Still can answer to that appeal?

Gerry: Now that’s the key point why we are taking action Sandra and that is part of the legal process as you know. There is already an injunction out against the book He is banned from repeating his thesis that Madeleine is dead and we were involved. Now that has been two separate judges plus the original judgemental file have said that thats what we will do with discussing the facts. Thats the correct place to discuss.Goncalo Amaral. And the Book…

Sandra: Are you saying that Goncalo Amaral doesn’t have the right to share his opinion, his conviction under the evidence he gathered into a book? He doesn’t have freedom of expression to say that and to publish it?

Gerry: There is a difference between freedom of expression and evidence to support a theory. What the judges have said there isn’t evidence to support this theory, so he shouldn’t be saying it. And is about as much as we want to say about him. You know that’s a legal process and we have challenged it, it’s been through the judicial process and thats….

Sandra: The files were closed and no thesis won. How can you explain that after Goncalo Amaral, Paulo Rebelo, the next investigator, also pursued this thesis? He also investigated the possibility of you both play the keyrole in Madeleine’s disappearance?

Gerry: It was investigated, the evidence was presented to the judiciary, and the judiciary concluded there was no evidence to support that thesis, that’s very…

Sandra: No DNA, but how do you explain…

Gerry: No no…

Sandra: …the coincidence…

Gerry: The DNA is only one aspect of it, there was no evidence to support our involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance, that is the key thing. Madeleine is still missing, we are here as her family to continue the search. Now I can’t speak for people who have read the book but obviously it doesn’t stand up to critical appraisal (?).

Sandra: But this is the first time that you give us a big interview not being arguidos, not being arguidos. Since then. erm. So now I feel free to ask you this directly. How can you explain the coincidence of the scent of cadaver found by british and not portuguese dogs?

Kate: Sandra, maybe you should ask the judiciary because they have examined all evidence. I mean we are also Madeleine’s mum and dad and we are desperate for people to help us find Madeleine which is why we are here today. The majority of people are inherently good and I believe the majority of people in Portugal are inherently good people and I am asking them if they will help us spread this message to that person or people…

Sandra: So you don’t have an explanation for that?

Gerry: Ask the dogs (smirk) Sandra.

Sandra: Ask the dogs? No Gerry. Now I feel free to ask you, don’t you feel free to answer me?

Gerry: I can tell you that we have also looked at evidence about (haha) cadaver dogs and they are incredibly unreliable.

Sandra: Unreliable?

Gerry: Cadaver dogs, yes. That’s what the evidence shows, if they are tested scientifically.

Sandra: You read the files, Kate?

Kate: Yes I have read the files.

Sandra: What did shock you most? Any part of the… any detail that…you weren’t… aware of? Something that has really surprised you or you didn’t find anything?

Kate: Oh I have been through them and I have made notes and I passed that on to our investigation team obviously.

Sandra: And you found any evidence? Of anything?

Kate: Well obviously the only evidence I wanna find is who has taken Madeleine and where she is. They are the key things and until we actually get that bit of information you know we are always gonna feel like we are a long way away. But basically what we are doing is trying to get as much information as we can and trying to put the jig-shaw, jigsaw together, so finally we have the complete picture.

Sandra: And what about your friends? Did you have a pact of silence with your friends?

Kate: (laughing) You know the judicial secrecy?

Sandra: I know it but we don’t have it anymore.

Gerry: You have to put it into context of the situation that we were in…

Sandra: But now is the time to explain it…

Gerry: That, ar.. ar… article that was written in June was directly as a result of the journalist phoning all of us, and saying what can you tell us about it and we were under explicit instructions that we were not to talk about the details of the case, under judicial secrecy. So that is all that people did. And I don’t think that should be considered a pact of silence.We were told, that’s what we were to do. And you wouldn’t expect witnesses in other cases in any country to begin divulging information that may be useful to the perpetrator of the crime.

Sandra: Are you still friends? Do you plan another trips together or did it damage…?

Kate and Gerry: No No

Kate: We are still friends. We haven’t got any holidays planned but we are still friends. We are in touch with each other, we still meet up and see each other.

Sandra: Don’t you agree that there were a lot of details that in a certain way contribute to people to doubt of you, for example, when you went to the Vatican so quickly, all the contacts that you have made. Can I ask you Gerry, if you personally know Mr. Gordon Brown the Primeminister?

Gerry: (moving on his chair uncomfortably) No, and we still, we have never met Gordon Brown. We have spoken to him once on the phone several weeks after Madeleine was abducted. People have got to remember that, and what today is about… good ordinary people wanted to help find an innocent missing child. And that’s what happened. Clearly there was a huge amount of media coverage and people wanted to look at ways to help. Our government wanted to assist the investigation to find the missing child.

Sandra: Are they still supporting you, Mr. Gordon Brown still talks to you directly?

Gerry: We have had continued meetings with both the Home Office and also with the Foreign Office to discuss ways in which the search can continue. Obviously today is a prime example of law enforcement-LED initiative with CEOP with… in conjunction with other law enforcement agencies, Interpol, Europol, and you know, the key thing is, that law enforcement believe we can get information from those who may know.

Sandra: How could you explain that Clarence Mitchell left the British Government where he was a press speaker to be your press speaker?

Gerry: Obviously, when Clarence came first out to Portugal working for the Government at that time he came out and spent I think almost three, two to three weeks with us, and he got to know us very very well, and he felt very very passionate about the search for Madeleine and when the opportunity arose, erm, you know, we asked him if he would come back and shield us from the intense media interest and that is what Clarence has done superbly well, and he has become an extremely good friend during this.

Sandra: But he must be paid.?

Gerry: He was paid, that’s right

Sandra: And now he must be paid?

Gerry: yeah, but you know…

Sandra: Isn’t it difficult for you to pay him?

Gerry: You know, in the first period Brian Kennedy paid his salary and then he was subsequently paid by the fund and now, you know, he works part-time on this, and he is a consultant for Freud Agency, so, you know, as the media interest dropped down, we haven’t needed a full-time spokesperson. He still works with us, we are working very closely with him and he has done a brilliant job protecting us and allowing us to have some degree of normality as a family considering the very very intense media interest.

Sandra: You have also hired a new communication agency back in Portugal. Why do you think you need it and is it easy for you to afford it?

Gerry: Well again, it is an agreement that it is funded out of Madeleine’s fund. It’s a decision that was made by the directors of the fund, because we felt… Kate and I are both directors of the fund, there are nine directors in total, that to really make the search successful we had to present information to the portuguese public, given how much had been written in a negative way about us, and obviously we want to work with someone who understands the portuguese culture and the portuguese media and how we could persuade people that Madeleine is still out there and still can be found….

Sandra: Until when do you think that you will afford all this? Two lawyers in Portugal, a news agency, Clarence Mitchell… I don’t know if you still have the two lawyers that you have hired here in London?

Kate: It’s not ideal, you know, Sandra. We wouldn’t have any lawyers, we wouldn’t need any appeal if we weren’t in the situation….

Sandra: But don’t you feel strangled? Don’t you feel that some day you feel it will be finished the money?

Kate: We have to do whatever we can to find Madeleine and obviously we have to look at sort of , you know, if the fund starts to run out we have to try and get more money in, we can’t stop…

Sandra: And how do you do it?

Gerry: Well, you know, people have been extremely kind. You have to remember that the fund was set up initially because so many people offered money to try and help and wanted to help and were prepared to donate. We would love nothing better for Madeleine to be found and for the remaining moneys in the fund to go to helping other families of missing children both in the UK and in Portugal, and that is one of our objectives when we have found Madeleine… AND her abductor, then the moneys will be used for that. Obviously if the money runs out… is running out, then we have to look at alternative ways of fundraising erm we have done small events, community events, which have been very good for team building. We have had a small auction in Madeleine’s school and the school where the twins are.

Sandra: Do you still have the support of Mr. Richard Branson, JK Rowling, this multimillionaire that initially gave you a lot of money?

Gerry: (burblegurgle) ..an independent investigation that has been funded completely out of Madeleine’s fund… I mean an event like today, there is no specific cost for it, and this is obviously the internet, people already have subscriptions, they can do this. There is the willingness of the population to help and I think we will find hundreds of thousands if not millions of people today will forward this link to their contacts in countries all over the world. That is cheap.

Sandra: Do you still have money in the fund?

Gerry: There is some money still in the fund and it continues to be used and we will use every single penny in that fund in the search for Madeleine.

Sandra: You have asked Goncalo Amaral to pay you 1 million euros for damage erm for the defamation for example. Do you need that money to finance the campaign?

Kate: The reason why we have taken action against Goncalo Amaral is the damage that he has done for Madeleine. That’s our main focus.

Sandra: Which motives could he have to make up all this story?

Gerry: We can’t speak for Goncalo Amaral.

Sandra: But I presume that you think something? Why should an investigator make it up, a story without evidence

Kate: It has to be financial gain, hasn’t it?

Sandra: You think that he made this with the commercial perspective?

Kate: You would have to ask him to get the answer to this.

Sandra: So this is your idea?

Kate: It’s a possibility, isn’t it. I mean I have….

Sandra: You think Goncalo Amaral is trying to win money playing with your, erm your child’s life?

Kate: We have to wonder why an ex-inspector of the PJ would want to convince the population that Madeleine is dead, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever. And that question should be asked.

Sandra: Do you feel that there is a difference of treatment between the portuguese authorities and the british authorities? In any moment did you feel, or do you feel still, that you were victims of the portuguese investigation?

Gerry: The key victim is Madeleine. I mean, that’s what the crime is about. We know we had to be investigated. And we have been investigated.

Sandra: Sorry Gerry, but you Kate said once, that you were feeling bad with what they asked you inside the PJ, trying to get a confession from you…

Kate: I know the truth Sandra, you know what I mean, and all I want to do is find Madeleine and I was upset…

Sandra: So have you forgotten everything that already passed? It’s passed for you both?

Kate: The only thing we can do now is look forward, you know, you know. There is lessons to be learned by everyone ourselves included, from what’s happened. But, all we want to do is find Madeleine and the only way of doing that is by looking forwards and trying to be proactive and see what we can do now, which is why this message has gone out today.

Sandra: Did you go back to work? Are you working already?

Kate: I am working full time in the campaign to find Madeleine. I am looking after Sean and Amelie.

Sandra: You don’t have any plans to go back to the clinic?

Kate: No I don’t, no I don’t

Sandra: You don’t. And talking about the twins. Now the time is passing. Two years and a half since Madeleine disappeared. They are growing up. How will you be able to explain them what happened one day they have the age to really understand it?

Gerry: It’s like filling in a picture for them with the information we have available and we will give them as their minds inquire, and as they are able to handle that information, then we will answer all of their questions openly and honestly.

Sandra: But what will you tell them

Gerry: Well, we will answer the questions. So what they ask us we will tell them. And we tell them exactly what happened and what information we know. And what we do know, is that we are continuing to look for their sister. They want people to look for their sister.

Sandra: But will you go into details about what happened?

Kate: We will be led by them. We have had avice from a child psychologist and they said Sean and Amelie would lead the way. If they ask a question answer them honestly. We are not gonna rush them, but if they ask something, then obviously we will answer them.

Sandra: They are in the same school where Madeleine was?

Gerry: Well she didn’t get a chance to start yet so, she was there, her place is there, and the twins are there now.

Sandra: The room, Madeleine’s room is still the same?

Kate: The bedroom? Yeah, it’s quite a few more presents in it now, but yeah, it’s still the same.

Sandra: And what do you keep telling the twins whenever they ask for her? I presume that they ask about her a lot of times?

Kate: Well they know she is missing, you know, and they know we are looking for her, and they also say things to me like, if they see things like a Madeleine sticker or a poster, they say “look Mummy they are helping to find Madeleine with us”, and they might point at other people saying “Mummy are they helping us to find Madeleine?” and you know, so *shrugs*

Sandra: Is it still very hard for you or are you getting used to this reality? Are you trying to live with it?

Kate: You have to, I think, you have to adapt and you have to function. And if we want to look after Sean and Amelie, and if you want to search for Madeleine, then you have to function. Erm. I am obviously stronger than I was say a year ago, and, obviously the emotion is still there…but…*sigh*

Gerry: Well we do as much as we possibly can to ensure that the twins see us happy, and see us happy with them, and they give us a tremendous amount of joy, and our life, you know, on a day-to-day basis superficially would look like any other family with two young children. Obviously one of our children is missing. And they know that and they know that that’s not good and they want her back and they understand why on occasion, you know, that we are particularly upset and… we all want Madeleine back to be a complete family again, but the twins are coping fantastic…

Sandra: You told me once that you are both living a nightmare. In your more optimistical perspective, what do you imagine, what do you think, it could be the best way to recover Madeleine.

Gerry: I think, the first thing today is that this message, it can be downloaded and distributed, be heard and seen by someone who knows, and it well tweak their conscience and get them to give information to bring Madeleine back.

Sandra: The last lead that you have shared with us was about a women in Barcelona. Has this anything to do with this appeal? (Kate shakes head?) Is it for that, that you are asking the relatives of people that can be involved in her disappearance, to call you?

Gerry: I think the first thing to say is that the investigation is to be dealt with by professionals and obviously we have got David Edgar working for us or law enforcement as a project (?). Today is about this appeal. It is completely separate. It is going out in seven different languages, we want it to be spread as far and as wide as possible because we don’t know where Madeleine is and we don’t know who took her and that’s why we need the public’s help to spread the email, an email to all your contacts. I know you have already done it, Sandra.

Sandra: Thank you very much to you both.

Anyone who believes in the right to free speech ..please sign..

IRONSIDE, on September 25th, you asked if you wish me to post anything on any forums just let me know.

I have been blocked from using Stevo’s site and in any event I do not want to waste my time there. As I said further up this thread—-A LIE is half way around the World before the TRUTH has got its boots on

Please copy and paste # the following on these two sites – -Joana Morais Blog and Abuse of Power, and any other with a proven track record of telling it as it is—-

IRONSIDE, on November 7th, 2009 at Saturday,November,7,2009 Said:

Thanks Mr.Green for the info…I no longer post on Stevos site but I have obviously today read what has been going on. I am concerned that Debbie has admitted herself that she has been in contact with Mitchel and Carter Ruck…What I do not understand if Debbie felt there was any ‘Fraud’ involved why has she gone to them. Anna esse also has every right to be angry with the fact that it appears Stevo has copied her translation of the book ‘Truth of the Lie’ stevo also claims to have been in contact with Amaral. Amaral denies any knowledge of this ‘contact’…it is very sad that this has come down once more to money. The root of all Evil…
I think it was only a question of time before the Mccanns got their claws into Tony. they have been waiting for the right moment. Lets not forget that Tony tried to have the Mccanns charged with neglect and rightly so. The Mccanns are a very arrogant self serving pair. I have also been reading up on Jim Gamble …a man not to be trusted it would seem. Well. what a surprise, when have the Mccanns ever been involved with anyone decent. it is not their style. Mafia types are what they look for. Of course I do not know Debbie or Tony and both are saying different things. For an outsider such as myself it is hard what to believe.i do however have a very bad feeling about Debbies involvement with >Mitchel and Carter Ruck. I will just stand back and see what develops. The whole episode has made me very sad and today has been a victory for the Evil mccanns. It has not gone unoticed by me that this was leaked to a Murdoch newspaper a great protector of the Mccanns. once again thank you Mr.Green.
Reply
#
Grenville Green, on November 7th, 2009 at Saturday,November,7,2009 Said:

Ironside
It is very sad Debbie has done what she has done with the encouragement of Stevo. In my opinion Stevo is behaving badly because he wants to control and keep The Madeleine Foundation web site as it is.

As you know from the Carter-Ruck papers and Tony’s response conditions applied and it is those conditions Stevo appears to want Debbie to breach.

I am of the strong opinion Stevo is using Debbie’s emotional state for his own ends.and it has backfired on both of them.

Tony is a man of Integrity, there is no fraud. and a British child is still missing..

We have a meeting on the 14th of this month, a new committee and all is not doom and gloom.

KBO (Keep Buggering On)
Sir Winston Churchill

As you know from the Carter-Ruck papers and Tony’s response conditions applied and it is those conditions Stevo appears to want Debbie to breach.

I am of the strong opinion Stevo is using Debbie’s emotional state for his own ends.and it has backfired on both of them.

Tony is a man of Integrity, there is no fraud. and a British child is still missing..

We have a meeting on the 14th of this month, a new committee and all is not doom and gloom.

KBO (Keep Buggering On)
Sir Winston Churchill

It is said a lie is half way around the world before the truth has got its boots on. Below is a statement by Tony Bennett which answers your questions.
———————————————————————————————————-
Statement by Tony Bennett, Secretary of The Madeleine Foundation, in response to an article in today’s (7 November) ‘Sun’

I woke up this morning to read an article in today’s ‘Sun’ newspaper notifying its five million or so readers that there is a ‘fraud probe’ in relation to the finances of The Madeleine Foundation.

‘The Sun’ did not contact me before printing the article.

The recent background to this article, for those not so far aware of events of the last fortnight, is as follows.

On 26 October, for reasons best known to herself, Debbie Butler, Chairman of The Madeleine Foundation, decided to launch a strong personal attack on a public internet forum, ‘Missing Madeleine’, which included many false allegations against me.

Due to this and many other related issues, the Committee of The Madeleine Foundation was left with no alternative by Monday 2 November but to expel her from membership under Paragraph 6 of our Constitution. On the same day, our bank was notified of a dispute, notified that one of the signatories to the account had been expelled, and informed that a members’ meeting would be held on 14 November when new signatories would be appointed.

The allegations by Debbie Butler of ‘fraud’ and financial impropriety followed these events. There is no truth in any of her claims.

I deal now with specific issues on ‘The Sun’ report.

Dealing with the false claim that I ‘ran the account from my home in Harlow’, the brief facts are these: 1. The branch of the bank in which the account is held is in Debbie Butler’s home town of Maidstone 2. The account was jointly operated in that not one penny could be taken out of the account without both Debbie Butler and I signing cheques.

‘The Sun’ article refers to the possibility that people might have mistakenly donated to The Madeleine Foundation thinking it was to support the fund to help find Madeleine. No-one donated on that basis. Incidentally Debbie Butler has publicly called for people who donated to the Foundation to ask for their money back. No-one has yet done so.

Yes, the account has just over £2,700 in it.

As for claims that people sent in ‘tens of thousands of pounds’, the actual total income to the Foundation between its establishment and the end of September 2009 was £8,104.05, made up a follows:

Income £ p

Loan from T Bennett 20 00

Loans from D Butler 350 00
Donations 590 00

Cash subscriptions 10 00
All Net PayPal Income
(payments for books,
subscriptions and
donations) 5580 00
Cash sales of the booklet 1464 90
Retail booksellers 19 15
TOTAL: 8104 05

Madeleine Foundation members were recently sent a set of income and expenditure accounts in our newsletter.

I now deal with ‘The Sun’ statement that ‘Mr Bennett is thought to have £90,000 in private accounts’. This is how that statement arose.

At the meeting with Kirwans, Solicitors, Liverpool, on 2 October 2009, the lawyers asked about our personal financial circumstances. I told them honestly that my current annual income was £14,000 (I have just filed my tax return) and that I had ‘a few tens of thousands’ saved up for my old age. This is where the ‘£90,000’ comes from.

I take this opportunity to say that I have not made one penny either from the sale of ’60 Reasons’ nor in any way from The Madeleine Foundation; indeed it was my declared intent at the outset to make not a penny in any way connected with Madeleine’s disappearance. Our accounts will shortly be audited and that will I trust make it still plainer that there is no fraud or financial impropriety or irregularity in the conduct of The Madeleine Foundation’s affairs.

Contrary to the hopes of Gerry and Kate McCann as expressed in ‘The Sun’ article that ‘The Foundation is now in meltdown’, we have new blood on our Committee, we have a members’ meeting shortly, and we have plans.

Finally I wish to take this opportunity to clear up a few false rumours that appear to have been put about on the internet by Debbie Butler and including statements made by ‘Stevo’, Debbie Butler’s friend, on what was our website, http://www.madeleinefiudnation.org

I have seen claims that Debbie Butler put large amounts of money into The Madeleine Foundation. That is wholly untrue. As the above record of income shows, she made a loan of £350 in the initial stages to help get ’60 Reasons’ printed and published. On 7 October 2009 she asked for the return of that loan and I sent her a cheque the very same day. However, in addition, as the bank records will prove, I sent her more than £350. I sent her a cheque for £500 which included a further £150 which was my best estimate of the amount she had underclaimed in postage and stationery to date. There is email correspondence on this issue which I am happy to disclose if asked.

Second, I have seen references made to a ‘mysterious amount’ paid out of The Foundation’s accounts. This was a sum of £800.00 expenses paid to me on 30 September on a cheque signed by Debbie Butler and which she knows about. The £800, which is fully backed by receipts, consists of a back claim for postage and stationery etc. and also a payment of £245.00 I made to Vera Steinke to finance a print run of 250 copies of the German translation of ’60 Reasons’ (income from those sales is pending). The large claim for postage etc. arose for two reasons.

First, Debbie Butler had become increasingly erratic in sending out ’60 Reasons’ to those who had paid for it via PayPal, and I was getting increasing numbers of complaints from people whose orders had not been fulfilled. I simply had to take over the sending out of the booklets to ensure that that side of our work was run efficiently.

Second, the press articles about the distribution of the ’10 Reasons’ leaflet in Leicestershire in August caused a huge upsurge of interest in our work and many new orders for booklets and other enquiries. Thus postage costs rose rapidly for the weeks after that.

I had planned to leave early to see my mother on the south coast this weekend, today 7 November is my late father’s birthday. When I’ve sent this off, we shall be away for the weekend, but if anyone has any queries I’ll be happy, as always, to answer them, after then.

Needless to say, when I have a moment, there will be a complaint from me to The Press Complaints Commission about the article, which appears to have been printed based on ‘information’ supplied by Debbie Butler and hs not in any way been checked with me.

I’m downcast but not defeated.

Tony Bennett

Target … the Madeleine Foundation blames parents Gerry and Kate McCann for their daughter’s disappearance

By NEIL SYSON

FRAUD cops are probing the bank account of a campaign group which says Maddie McCann is dead – and aims to blame her parents.

Controversial lawyer Tony Bennett helped set up the Madeleine Foundation, but its account is now frozen.

Detectives want assurances over tens of thousands of pounds sent in by people supporting his warped aims.

Bennett, 62, ran the account from his home in Harlow, Essex.

Much of the cash came from the sale of £4 books blaming the McCanns after the three-year-old vanished in Portugal in 2007.

The couple think many people may have mistakenly donated believing they were funding the hunt for Maddie.

The account holds £2,700 but Mr Bennett is thought to have £90,000 in private accounts.

A rift had developed between Bennett and foundation chairwoman Debbie Butler. Police stressed the case was still only an investigation and no arrests had been made.

A source close to Gerry and Kate McCann said: “This foundation is now in meltdown. They can’t wait to see the end of it.”

in the Scum

Do the things you describe sound familiar? Well, if I said “Have you been following me around?” Would that answer your question? LOL! Yes, yes, yes and yes. Oh my, yes!

The dizziness, the balance problems, the numbness and tingling and the itchy skin. My dear, they all have been constant companions of mine for years. The itchiness got a little better after my thyroid problem (hypothyroidism) was addressed, but I still have flare ups that feel like someone has dipped me in itching powder. One thing to consider is fibromyalgia. I also have fibromyalgia (FMS) and from some of the research I’ve done, some people with FMS deal with itchiness. As I mentioned in the original blog, autoimmune disorders tend to cluster…meaning it you have one, there’s a better than good chance you’ll have another. Also, they tend to cluster in families. This is so true in my family.

The numbness and tingling can be neuralgia and/or neuropathy. I’ve dealt with both…the first in my head and the latter in my right leg. The numbness and tingling in my head started at the back of my head, crept over the top of my head and reach down the front of my head. At times it felt like little bugs were crawling all over my head…and then my nose and mouth would go numb. The neuropathy in my leg in constant…and painful. It started out as a small spot and has now spread to cover almost my whole outer thigh.

The fatigue, balance issues, dizziness and vision problems…it ALL is sooooo familiar. My fatigue is debilitating most of the time. Keep in mind that dry eyes presents itself in several ways…and what you mentioned are classic. Also, it seems that Hasimoto’s and Sjogren’s can be synonymous.

T, also keep in mind that sometimes blood work may not reveal whether you have Sjogren’s or not. I went through several blood work ups…the results would say yes, maybe, no, yes again, no, yes, maybe and so on…you get the picture. So many things can or might affect the outcome of blood tests…including lotions, deodorant, shampoo, etc. Finally I found my current rhuematologist who I’ve been seeing since 1993. He’s one of the best in the country and he knew enough to send me to have a lip biopsy performed. It came back positive for Sjogren’s. Finally I was able to start treatment…

Finally, I would also direct you to the National Sjogren’s Association. They have excellent up to date information including publications and are strong advocate for awareness of Sjogren’s and Sjogren’s patients.

T, good luck and God speed. Check back in and let me know how you are doing.

Bev