Profile image
By The Daily Sheeple
Contributor profile | More stories
Story Views

Last Hour:
Last 24 Hours:

Madeleine McCann Parents’ Embedded Confessions of Complicity in Her Disappearance

Saturday, November 26, 2016 15:45
% of readers think this story is Fact. Add your two cents.


Richard D. Hall’s ongoing investigation into the bizarre disappearance of Madeleine McCann has unveiled an embedded story within the details of the McCann’s own statements about their daughter. Hall originally released his investigation into Madeleine’s disappearance in July 2015. Through statement analysis, deception and guilt can emerge out of the fine details, and that is exactly what Hall has found.

Hall recently interviewed Peter Hyatt, an experienced expert in statement analysis, to investigate further the degree to which the McCann’s statements are questionable, or even incriminating, as to their involvement in Madeleine’s disappearance.

In the interview, some notable inconsistencies in speech emerge which appear to further bolster Hall’s case that Madeleine’s parents know more about her disappearance than they are willing to say, and they likely think they’ve gotten away with it. Richard Hall explains:

In November 2016 I traveled to the United States to meet and interview Peter Hyatt. Peter is a highly respected expert in statement analysis and in his work he teaches other professionals and assists law enforcement on criminal cases. When we speak, the process of constructing sentences in our mind involves deciding which tense to use, which words to select from our vocabulary and what order to put them in.

This mental process all happens in a fraction of a second. If somebody is constructing sentences from their experiential memory, ie, recalling something real that actually happened to them, the process of word selection follows particular patterns and characteristics, which can be easily identified by a trained statement analyst. If however a person is fabricating and being untruthful when they speak, the natural cognitive process of choosing and ordering words is interrupted, because the mind must censor and insert artificial information in a very short time period.

This means the language of somebody who is fabricating is characteristically different and can be picked up by a trained analyst like Peter Hyatt. He has analysed in depth an interview that Kate and Gerry McCann gave in 2011 and throughout the entire interview both Kate and Gerry it appears show signs of deception. Not only that, Peter determines from their language what he believes to be what it is they are concealing. The conclusions are shocking.

“She was [an] incredibly beautiful baby, actually,” said Gerry McCann in an interview. Kate interjected:

We sound like the most biased parents on the planet now but she was just really compact and was really the really nice, round, perfect head… and… you know… and then she, she opened her mouth… the whole world knew she was with us…

Upon analyzing these statements, Hyatt explains the red flags he sees here:

So, I don’t assign to this a red flag because of the context. It does concern me at this point—it’s just a little bit of an alarm now—that in an interview of a missing child they are talking about her in the past tense. I expect some sort of follow-up that would be in the present tense. A single slip into past-tense is an indicator of belief or knowledge that the child is deceased, and that’s what’s concerning about that.

But there are also some other things… One of the things is this, parents of missing children who show guilty knowledge of what happened to the child will often find a subtle way of insulting the child, insulting the victim, blaming the victim, disparaging the victim… In guilty statements, within human nature, there is some drive to justify what happened, to clear oneself.

So, I don’t like several things about this; I don’t like a past-tense reference without following in present-tense. And we have a praising of the baby that I do like—”and then [when] she opened her mouth, the whole world knew she was with us,” is a subtle way of saying she was really loud. I’m not sure that sounds like praise… And given the setting of an interview, where the child is missing, it’s not something I expected to hear. Now, it’s not a point I’m going to hang my hat on, but I’ve been called to the attention now that maybe Madeleine was a bit loud for them.

Considering the recent reports of John Podesta and his brother matching the sketches of men implicated in the kidnapping of Madeleine McCann, maybe this statement analysis sheds some light into the criminal child sex trafficking network that is currently operating globally. Could the McCanns have had foreknowledge of their daughter’s abduction? Is there reason why they would refer to their currently missing daughter in the past-tense?


Hyatt continued:

By the way, I’m not sure if anyone is paying attention at this point; there’s a missing child here that I’ve had no concern expressed for. This is why this interview jumped out at me. She’s actually bringing it to the point where her 3 year old child is some sort of intuitive expert. Your child is missing! What are you doing? When are you going to talk about that?

Delivered by The Daily Sheeple

We encourage you to share and republish our reports, analyses, breaking news and videos (Click for details).

Contributed by Ryan Banister of The Daily Sheeple.


BIN NOTE: If by now you haven’t figured out that Facebook and Google are in cahoots with the corrupt government, then I feel for you, but for those who are well aware of the issues it’s high time you switched over to It is a website that is similar to Facebook but without all the censorship.


We encourage you to Share our Reports, Analyses, Breaking News and Videos. Simply Click your Favorite Social Media Button and Share.

Report abuse


Your Comments
Question   Razz  Sad   Evil  Exclaim  Smile  Redface  Biggrin  Surprised  Eek   Confused   Cool  LOL   Mad   Twisted  Rolleyes   Wink  Idea  Arrow  Neutral  Cry   Mr. Green

Total 7 comments
  • 2QIK4U

    This is why i wrote wondering how the mcanns felt when they heard podestas were there… It all fits together ..

  • Richard

    Just who is investigating this crime? How about us “waterboarding these horrible pedophiles?” NOT into violence, but when it gets down to little children, think we need to threat ‘molesters’ WORST THAN just terrorist… Only Crime that deserve such actions is Pedophiles….untreatable mental illness that if destroyed would help all sectors of OUR World. NATO should be cleaning house against these ultimate cowardly perverts. Citizens worldwide, handle these pervert locally, since many in public and safety force jobs attract these types all through history. Be aware when following snakes.

  • LifeIs

    Oh, come on. Let us count the fallacies.

    1. By interpretation, forced construction, you can make anything sound like what you want to hear.

    Language is imprecise. For example, we often use “we” instead of “I.” “We were losing daylight,” is what we all say. NOBODY says, “I was losing daylight.” It makes a person sound self-absorbed, to say “I” all the time.

    2. Lawyers and police are experts at taking advantage of this lack of precision.

    3. Deception is not the only thing that prevents spontaneity. Trying to remember does. Trying to avoid misunderstanding does. Trying to be polite does.

    4. Seeing how persons who are GUILTY speak does not tell you how INNOCENT people speak.

    Where is the study of how innocent people use language, under stress? Oh, there isn’t any.

    Phrenology. Eugenics. Polygraphs. Bite marks. Hearsay testimony about the thoughts of police dogs. Statement analysis. Hoaxes. Frauds. Charlatans. Pseudoscience.

    • VirusGuard

      I see you are in danger of having a brain

      Don’t trust the Camera, it can now lie and i suspect a lot of DNA evidance is being planted by the police just like they plant guns and dead bodys in the USA.

      The pigs are not on our side, it’s as plain as daylight

    • Roy Bean

      There’s a reason that ‘statement analysis’ is inadmissible. There’s a reason why polygraph evidence is inadmissible. Lifels has articulated a few of them and he’s barely scratched the surface.

      I like Richard’s work as a rule but he’s stepped out of the bounds of investigative reporting by giving credence to the opinions of Peter Hyatt.

      1. What are Hyatt’s credentials? Is he a law enforcement agent in the State of Maine, or anywhere else? The answer to this is no. He has a degree in bible studies and is a guitar teacher (according to his we profile).

      2. Hyatt hasn’t got a clue about British regional accents. This is evidence by his dissecting of Kate McCann’s statement regarding ‘you just want it’ to get light. Anyone from the North West of England, where Kate comes from, knows full well that she is speaking in the first person.

      3. Hyatt claims a high degree of accuracy-100% if memory serves. Hogwash. If that were the case, why bother with the expense of a trial. Just hand over a suspect’s statement to Hyatt and we can dispense with that.

      4. Richard failed to challenge any of Hyatt’s assertions. He allowed himself to be spoon-fed his opinions without question. Why is that? Moreover, Richard did his utmost to get Hyatt to agree that Madeleine died in the apartment some days before the alleged kidnapping. Hyatt appeared confused at first but eventually fell into line. Talk about trying to make the facts fit the theory. It was sloppy.

      5. Hyatt advises the parents of missing kids to take a polygraph, following the suggestion of John Walsh. If you are a suspect in any kind of criminal case, never give a polygraph. Ever. If you come under police investigation and it is clear that they consider you a suspect, ask for an attorney. The police will react by citing your non-cooperation but if the police are using people like Hyatt to aid with an investigation, you should not cooperate by taking a polygraph or by providing a written statement.

  • Fokofpoes

    Let me get this straight, for fame and celebrity, monetary gain those cocksuckers sold out and sacrificed their child?

    I’m not impressed. One two, like what I got for you, three times will I take you away.

  • Didianna

    In Portugal a new investigation has been opened into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Sergey Malinka, who was questioned in 2007 after the three-year-old (?) Madeleine went missing, was questioned again. Another suspect is said to be suffering from severe schizophrenia. All of those four being questioned are Portuguese citizens. Local Briton Robert Murat – who was himself questioned earlier – said it was “ridiculous” that Mr Malinka had been questioned as a suspect.

    Seems Podestas are not going to be investigated, so may be this is just an effort to find someone “quilty” in order to save Podestas and other pedos.

Top Stories
Recent Stories



Top Global

Top Alternative



Email this story
Email this story

If you really want to ban this commenter, please write down the reason:

If you really want to disable all recommended stories, click on OK button. After that, you will be redirect to your options page.