Freedom of Speech, the McCanns, and Searching for Maddie

by Pat Brown

I have been getting a lot of questions about my search fund to be established with monies from the sale of my book, Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Some of the stuff certain folks are saying is seriously ridiculous, so I thought it best I make a clear statement with simple points they can understand.

1. I am not giving or receiving any monies from the McCanns' search fund.

2. At present, 50% of monies received from the sale of the Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann will go to the Pat Brown Maddie Search Fund. The other 50% earned from the book is income, not donations. I am selling a product and do not have to donate all earnings (or any) to charitable causes (however, I do pro bono work on other cases as there are OTHER missing and murdered children and adults than Madeleine in this world, so part of my earnings through any means funds this). I have chosen to donate 50% of the book's earnings to my Maddie search fund since she is the focus of this book.

3. The Pat Brown Maddie Search Fund monies will be not be spent on a personal salary (any time spent will be pro bono). Monies will be used for expenses related to doing a search: travel, equipment, hiring of local PIs, or bringing in experts.

4. If I can cover any search expenses by another other method (media, work in the same location, etc.), then I will do so. I always endeavor to always keep costs low when I do pro bono work so that the funds will stretch further: inexpensive hotels, staying with local people, cheap meals, etc.). If I choose to spend above the cheapest rate I can achieve, I pay out-of-pocket.

5. The Pat Brown Maddie Search Fund will be transparent with all monies earned on the book tracked, all monies put into the account tracked, and all monies spent tracked. A full account will be made to the public of everything associated with my fund and my searches.

6. The Pat Brown Maddie Search Fund has no connection with the McCanns' search fund and the McCanns have not given my fund any endorsement. However, it would seem to me if I search in previously untargeted places and either locate Madeleine or eliminate those possibilities, then the search is nothing but beneficial to the McCanns and is following in the spirit of "Leaving No Stone Unturned."

7. There are four theories as to what happened to Madeleine which influence how one searches for the child; whether one thinks she is dead or alive.

One:, the child died accidentally in the apartment in Praia da Luz and there was a cover-up; then we are looking for a dead child in Portugal, Spain, or England.

Two: a local pedophile abducted Madeleine; then we are looking for a dead child in Praia da Luz, Portugal or nearby.

Three: A woman wanted a little girl and got a man to kidnap Madeleine. Then we are looking for a live child somewhere in the world.

Four: A pedophile sex ring kidnapped Madeleine and she is being raped and abused on a continuing basis. Then we are looking for a live child somewhere in the world.

Now, as one only has limited funds (even the McCanns, although they have been quite hefty), it behooves one to put the strongest efforts into the most likely scenario. If the McCanns were not involved in any way (other than neglect) in the disappearance of their daughter, they ought to be using kindhearted people's donations in the most proper way; looking for a pedophile who abducted, raped and murdered their little girl, get him arrested and convicted so that Madeleine gets justice, and prevent another little girl from the same horrible fate. They should be putting a good portion of their search and investigative efforts into locating a local child sex predator.

Why? Because the methodology and descriptions of how Madeleine was supposedly kidnapped and by whom match a person from the area without even a vehicle to take her away in. There is zero evidence of any fancy plot nor even a person smart enough to park a vehicle in the car park right outside the window of Madeleine's bedroom in with which to make a quick getaway. Instead, we have the purported actions and descriptions of some creepy, not-so-bright fellow walking down the street with a child in his arms in full view of everyone. The chances of Madeleine being taken by a desperate wanna-be-Mom or a sex ring are minimal.

Should the McCanns still consider these rare possibilities and still look for a living Madeleine? Well, I can't blame the McCanns (if innocent) for wanting to believe their daughter is alive, so I can understand and accept that they want to put some efforts into that miracle possibility. However, they should be honest enough and good enough stewards of donated monies I(if innocent) to admit the likelihood of Madeleine being dead is very, very high and the likelihood of her being buried somewhere in Praia da Luz or environs is also very, very high. Their efforts should be concentrated there, with some monies set aside for the miracle.

So, I will be focusing on the two top theories; that Madeleine died in an accident and her body was hidden somewhere, or a local pedophile took her and her body is buried locally. IF it turns out that I get ANY information that proves Madeleine was abducted or if any evidence turns up that points to her murder by a stranger, this information will go straight to the police and the McCanns. If Maddie was abducted and murdered by a child predator, I want justice for Maddie and I want that creep put away and I want other children to be safe from him.

My theory as I laid out in my Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann is just that; a theory. If evidence surfaces that changes my view of what happened to Madeleine, I have no problem disclosing this and adjusting my theory. Theories change based on available evidence; hence, they are called theories, not facts. Theories often change over time, even those postulated by law enforcement and the McCanns. Even Kate admits in her book, Madeleine, her theories of what happened that night have undergone change as she has spent more time analyzing the evidence or after receiving new information.

Why the McCanns had Carter-Ruck threaten Amazon with legal action to get a theory removed from public view is curious as it is only a theory, an opinion, one person's take on probabilities based on what is known at this point in time. Perhaps we will find out why they went to these lengths when the McCanns get on the witness stand in a court of law (when my lawsuit for libel and tortious interference with business makes it to court; I have retained prominent attorney Anne Bremner of Stanford Frey Cooper). Perhaps, then, they will explain why one person's opinion is so concerning they need to go to extremes to get have it silenced.

Madeleine McCann is the most recognized missing child in the world, with the most media attention of any missing child in the world. Unless I am mistaken, more money has been donated to finding Madeleine McCann than any child in the world. My Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann should hardly affect such a large and successful (moneywise) campaign; so one wonders if the real issue the McCanns have with my profile is that my theory might actually be correct.

I believe in Freedom of Speech. I don't object to the theories of others on cases even if they differ from mine. I don't even object to someone analyzing my theory and writing their opinion of it. I would never try to shut down their viewpoint (even when things are taken out of context and misrepresented in some way); I merely suggest that interested people go to the source and compare the two viewpoints and think for themselves about what theories and concepts are more supportable by evidence and logic.

The McCanns could simply have ignored this profiler's opinion on Madeleine's disappearance or made a statement that they do not think my analysis is very good. If the book was truly libelous as they claimed through their solicitors, Carter-Ruck, they should have informed me of this or sued me directly. Instead, they went behind the scenes and had the book pulled from the market. Inquiring minds wonder why.

I will be in Portugal in February to support Detective Amaral's fight against the McCanns in court, to begin search analysis, and to hear just what Gerry and Kate McCann have to say.

May the truth come out one day and justice for Madeleine McCann prevail.

The Profile of the Disappearance of Madeleine McCann is available online through Barnes & Noble and Smashwords.

Tweet

Baby Lisa: Gone, Baby, Gone

by Pat Brown

Pretty much, that is all we know right now. Ten-month-old baby Lisa Irwin was there and then she wasn't. Two weeks have passed since her disappearance and she hasn't reappeared, dead or alive. Wait, we know one other thing: she didn't climb out of her crib and go for a walkabout. Someone removed her from her home, so we know someone knows something. We just don't know who.

In missing baby cases where proof of abduction is weak, there ends up being two scenarios: the parents did something to the child or someone else slipped in and made off with the child. Unlike an abduction where a child is seen by witnesses being dragged into a vehicle or a case where a child walking from school never arrives home but her parents have solid alibis, a child who goes missing on the parents' watch often causes the parents to become suspects at some point in time. 

The parents of Sabrina Eisenburg became suspects very quickly; the parents of Madeleine McCann became suspects when the police focus when the detective on the case eventually began to think the timeline and parents' behavior didn't add up. Both of these cases remain open and the missing children have never been found. Both cases have a camp that believes the child was abducted and a camp that thinks the parents caused the death of the child and orchestrated a cover-up. If Baby Lisa is never found, the parents, Deborah Bradley and Jeremy Irwin, will be added to this club.

Once upon a time we believed parents of missing children: we never doubted that the people standing in front of the camera, crying and begging for their child's return, were playing us. But after we got burnt by the performance of Susan Smith and a number of others, we have become more skeptical. We now replay the video to see if the parent is crying real tears and we watch their body language. We examine every bit of evidence. We don' t want to yet again be duped into expending emotion on a parent who will turn out to be a killer and a fake and we don't want to spend our valuable time searching for a child whose parents already know exactly where she is.

Baby Lisa is missing and many people are not accepting the parents' story at face value and throwing them their unconditional support. They are searching for inconsistencies in their story, for proof that the baby was abducted, for alibis that are supportable, and for behaviors that don't seem right.

And, unfortunately, for Deborah Bradley and Jeremy Irwin, they are not faring well in the analysis.

The basic hurdles parents must clear these days to keep the public faith in them include:

• Real tears: Deborah clearly had tears in many interviews; Jeremy, no.
• Strong emotion: Deborah, yes, Jeremy, no.
• Nice house, well kept: yes
• Good looking baby: yes
• Charming photos and video: yes
• Willingness to speak in the media: yes, but then refused to do local media, only national. Made it seem like a desire to be famous might be at play
• Willingness to talk to the police: yes, until they stopped. Then they started again, only now police say they are not answering all the questions
• Pass the polygraph: Deborah says she failed; Jeremy didn't take one.
• Consistent story: Deborah has changed the time frame and now claims she was drunk; Jeremy originally said he checked the kids first and now says he talked to Deborah first
• Crime scene has visible signs of abduction: There is only a slightly opened window and left- unlocked door which does not prove an abduction occurred
• Parents show responsible behavior: Deborah now states it is okay for her to be drunk while caring for the children
• Suspicious strangers have been lurking around: So far there has only been a homeless handyman who is said to have been cleared
• Police not focusing on parents: The police are clearly heavily focusing on the parents
• Not lawyering up: They now have Joran van der Sloot's lawyer which may be smart but makes the them look like they need a strong defense.
• Not having things about the case that make you go "hmmm:" Deborah has stated that her children heard some strange noises but she has never asked them about what they heard and when because she doesn't want to upset them. Another thing that has bugged me is that Deborah has called her child "Baby Lisa" in television interviews; this is a name given by the media to identify the story and not something a mother usually calls her own child. Then, the "drunk/blackout" story came out after the parents got a lawyer and one wonders if this is a defense strategy for court or a way to excuse Deborah from answering any more police questions about what happened that night. Finally, Deborah changing the time she last saw her daughter (put her to bed) seems like a way to take emphasis off the later time, a time that her sons may have heard something and that Mom doesn't want to acknowledge. Oh, and Deborah also said she thought she would be arrested which is very odd unless she is aware there is more evidence implicating her than we know.

If I add up this list, I have to say the parents haven't done so well going over these hurdles. Public suspicion is likely increasing rather than decreasing. Right now, I would say as a criminal profiler, the evidence and behaviors indicate the parents are more likely to have involvement in the disappearance of Baby Lisa than a stranger to have abducted her. But, without proof or solid evidence, this set of inputs could be misinterpreted - an abductor might have managed to sneak in and out without detection; maybe he did turn on the lights and steal phones because he is a major weirdo. 

The parents might have odd behaviors - even personality disorders - which cause them to act in a manner that arouses suspicion but they still didn't do anything to their baby. Mom and Dad could be awful parents and still be innocent of doing anything criminal. But, because they are not passing the "hurdle" test very well, the police are going to be all over them, people are going to stop looking for the baby, and, if no abductor is ever caught (and the parents aren't found guilty), then, like the Eisenburgs and the McCanns, a cloud of suspicion will always hang over their heads.

Where do you stand on the likelihood of Baby Lisa's parents being involved in her disappearance? What would you add to the list of "hurdles?" How does what you have seen of the case and the parents affect your willingness to support the search for Lisa?

Tweet

Where is Jennifer Kesse?

by Stacy Dittrich

Jennifer Kesse (pictured left) had her future in the palm of her hands. Smart, beautiful, and surrounded by an extraordinary circle of family and friends, she was known for her infectious smile. The morning of January 24, 2006 began like any other day. She had just spent a glorious weekend in St. Croix with her boyfriend and small group of friends before flying home alone to Orlando, Florida. Going through her usual routine, Jennifer got herself ready for work. Over the prior weekend, Jennifer’s younger brother, Logan, had stayed at her condo with a group of friends—one who inadvertently left his cell phone. On this particular Tuesday morning, Jennifer set out in search of a roadside mailbox in an attempt to mail the cell phone back. There was never a morning that went by that Jennifer didn’t phone her boyfriend or family before she left for work. On this morning, no phone call was ever made.

Jennifer Kesse never arrived at work that day, nor has she been seen since.

Jennifer’s family quickly convinced police this wasn’t a typical missing person’s case. By noon on January 24th an exhaustive search by police, family, and friends began in an attempt to find Jennifer. Her condo was as it should be, no signs of struggle or robbery, but signs of Jennifer and her morning routine were everywhere; wet towels from her recent shower, and work clothes laid out on her bed.

At noon on January 26, 2006—just two days after Jennifer disappeared, her family’s worst fears were realized. Police located Jennifer’s Chevy Malibu parked in an apartment complex just one mile from her home. To further matters, surveillance video shows a male suspect parking the vehicle and quickly walking away from it. Jennifer was still nowhere to be found. Clearly, Jennifer Kesse was an endangered missing person and police worked around the clock to identify the suspect. I had the privilege of interviewing Jennifer’s father, Drew, last night on Justice Interrupted Radio. When asked about the identity or whereabouts of the subject, he simply stated, “He is as missing as Jennifer is.” Drew went on to describe how police used every tactic known to law enforcement to draw the suspect out, but it appears the suspect has evidently vanished. Three separate law enforcement agencies processed Jennifer’s vehicle extensively and had recovered some viable evidence, but it’s as if the suspect doesn’t exist, yet he remains at large.

The family refuses to give up hope. Launching a national media blitz, Jennifer’s case has drawn the attention of Good Morning America, Greta Van Susteren on Fox, numerous other television and radio shows, and specifically, now remains on the America’s Most Wanted web site. 48 Hours aired Jennifer’s story July 1, 2008.

On April 3, 2008, specific photographs of Jennifer’s four-leaf clover tattoo (pictured below), and the purse she was carrying when she was abducted were released by the Orlando Police Department in attempt to bring more attention to the case. Her purse has never been located, and it was determined she never mailed the cell phone, which hasn’t been recovered as well. Regardless, police are adamant they are not dealing with a robbery since various items of value were still inside her vehicle. The case remains highly active within the Orlando Police Department.

Drew Kesse continues to search for his daughter, his strength epitomizing a parent’s love for his child and those children missing everywhere. Just recently, he was named president of the Florida Missing Children’s Day Foundation, and was a driving force behind Florida’s Senate Bill 502—“The Jennifer Kesse and Tiffany Sessions Missing Persons Act”—a new bill to enhance Florida’s missing person’s laws. On Monday, September 14, 2009 Drew will lead a ceremony in remembrance of Florida’s missing persons to be held in the Capitol Courtyard. Everyone is encouraged to attend.

On the impressive web site dedicated to finding Jennifer, flyers of Jennifer and of the suspect (pictured left) are available for download. The family encourages everyone—no matter what state they reside, to distribute the flyers throughout their community.

For the Kesse family, each day is a struggle, but they continue to survive, hoping their efforts will eventually bring Jennifer home.

Tweet