Contents of Gerrys Stolen Wallet

I'm not posting the whole atricle because we all know this incident.....just wanted to highlight the photos stolen and ask why he never submitted the latest.???


Stolen Madeleine photos returned to father

By Fiona Govan in Sotogrande

Last Updated: 2:01am BST 02/07/2007




Precious photos of missing Madeleine McCann have been anonymously returned to her family almost two weeks after they were stolen from her father on a trip to London.


Gerry and Kate McCann: Leaving their apartment


Gerry McCann, 39, was said to be delighted today at having two "irreplaceable" pictures of his abducted daughter back in his possession.

One picture is said to show Madeleine at 15 months old, while another was taken in church shortly before her disappearance on May 3.

It's highly unlikely that his wallet was stolen at all. We only have Gerry's word for that. I think his credit cards needed to be compromised for some reason. He also used the blog to pass on messages because they thought all mobiles and emails were tapped.

It may be one of the reasons Gerry wanted to take all his blogs of the internet and tried to invoke copyright.

Two other items we only have Gerry's word for:
the fridge which was broken en put on the local dump. Lots of people remember it and in any case who would make it up? For what reason?
the man he helped on the plane over who was taken away in an ambulance. You would have thought the tabloids would have jumped on that.

Those photographs? I'm very interested - they may well exist and it may be yet another cryptic message from Gerry to someone.

Don't forget: Gerry thinks he's clever and he thinks we're stupid.

I also don't believe a word of this incident, and I would think any investigating police officer would see a big red flag surrounding this alleged stolen wallet.... so soon after his little girl's disappearance.

The "stolen" wallet is not only a red flag, but one of a great many red flags.

Coincidences do indeed occur and people do have runs of bad luck, but honestly all the things that allegedly befell Healy/McCann, all the odd things they did (Cleaning, Fridge, not Searching etc. etc.) and all the inconsistencies in virtually everything they have told us are frankly beyond comprehension.

Also the UK police said that they had no report of his stolen wallet. You would have to report it to stop your cards.

Is it normal to take photographs inside a church?

Wintabells wrote:Is it normal to take photographs inside a church?

Usually only at Holy Communions, weddings or Confirmations.

Edit: and Christenings

I'm just wondering why his old address was stated, why did he not notify the DVLA of his change of address, he had moved to Rothley about a Year
before the holiday. I do believe the photos exist though and that the wallet was lost or stolen. Does a Driving Licence have your Name and Address on.?

chrissie wrote:

Wintabells wrote:Is it normal to take photographs inside a church?

Usually only at Holy Communions, weddings or Confirmations.

Edit: and Christenings

Morning chrissie, I'm not a Catholic but my ex was and my Sons were confirmed when they were about 6 yrs old. Maybe Madeleine was in church for a
confirmation or witnessing one.

I think the description of the photos is too exact for it not to be true.

chrissie wrote:

Wintabells wrote:Is it normal to take photographs inside a church?

Usually only at Holy Communions, weddings or Confirmations.

Edit: and Christenings

Thanks for your response Chrissie.

I don't know much about these matters, being an atheist, but I assume Madeleine was too young for Holy Communion... is that right? I guess they could have been to a wedding. If these photos were in his wallet, I assume they were actual prints, and that the negatives were no longer accessible. So perhaps they were taken at someone's wedding and Gerry/Kate had some of the prints, one of which was in Gerry's wallet (odd that he only carried photos of one of his children, given that he felt so proud and lucky to have three... but still.) It would be very interesting to know if this wallet/photos story is true. I can't help but think that any info they volunteer is suspicious, but can't for the life of me begin to imagine what he could have been up to.

Panda wrote:
I'm just wondering why his old address was stated, why did he not notify the DVLA of his change of address, he had moved to Rothley about a Year
before the holiday. I do believe the photos exist though and that the wallet was lost or stolen. Does a Driving Licence have your Name and Address on.?

Yes. And it is a Criminal Offence not to notify the Authorities of a change.

Gerry mccanns had his wallet stolen with pics and credit cards in, the credit cards he doesn't own and the very same card he was using at the ATM....no thief throws a wallet away with the cards still in....stoopid.


Lie...didn't happen.

Wintabells wrote:

chrissie wrote:

Wintabells wrote:Is it normal to take photographs inside a church?

Usually only at Holy Communions, weddings or Confirmations.

Edit: and Christenings

Thanks for your response Chrissie.

I don't know much about these matters, being an atheist, but I assume Madeleine was too young for Holy Communion... is that right? I guess they could have been to a wedding. If these photos were in his wallet, I assume they were actual prints, and that the negatives were no longer accessible. So perhaps they were taken at someone's wedding and Gerry/Kate had some of the prints, one of which was in Gerry's wallet (odd that he only carried photos of one of his children, given that he felt so proud and lucky to have three... but still.) It would be very interesting to know if this wallet/photos story is true. I can't help but think that any info they volunteer is suspicious, but can't for the life of me begin to imagine what he could have been up to.

Madeleine would have been too young for Holy Communion. That takes place around the age of 7 and confirmation is usually around 13 or 14.

They could have been taken at someone else's 'event' (for want of a better word). I would assume that they were prints and he didn't have the negatives or digitally saved. And I agree, why not photos of all three children.

The whole stolen wallet story has never added up for me. He didn't report it to the police.

kitti wrote:Gerry mccanns had his wallet stolen with pics and credit cards in, the credit cards he doesn't own and the very same card he was using at the ATM....no thief throws a wallet away with the cards still in....stoopid.


Lie...didn't happen.

Plus it was apparently posted back to his former address on the same day as it was stolen. Why would the finder not just hand it in to the police station rather than go to the bother of writing out an envelope and buying a stamp?

The whole story is weird and too detailed.

Wintabells wrote:The whole story is weird and too detailed.

Exactly my thoughts.

chrissie wrote:

kitti wrote:Gerry mccanns had his wallet stolen with pics and credit cards in, the credit cards he doesn't own and the very same card he was using at the ATM....no thief throws a wallet away with the cards still in....stoopid.


Lie...didn't happen.

Plus it was apparently posted back to his former address on the same day as it was stolen. Why would the finder not just hand it in to the police station rather than go to the bother of writing out an envelope and buying a stamp?

Maybe, Gerry faked the Wallet being stolen so he could apply for new Credit cards which statements would only be printed from the date of the new number. The PJ applied for 6 months statements so I presume there must have been a reason. The Home Secretary refused on the grounds 6 months was too intrusive and asked for a lesser figure but the PJ did not submit a lower figure.

Panda wrote:

chrissie wrote:

kitti wrote:Gerry mccanns had his wallet stolen with pics and credit cards in, the credit cards he doesn't own and the very same card he was using at the ATM....no thief throws a wallet away with the cards still in....stoopid.


Lie...didn't happen.

Plus it was apparently posted back to his former address on the same day as it was stolen. Why would the finder not just hand it in to the police station rather than go to the bother of writing out an envelope and buying a stamp?

Maybe, Gerry faked the Wallet being stolen so he could apply for new Credit cards which statements would only be printed from the date of the new number. The PJ applied for 6 months statements so I presume there must have been a reason. The Home Secretary refused on the grounds 6 months was too intrusive and asked for a lesser figure but the PJ did not submit a lower figure.

Could be.

There's more on walletgate here, thanks to Nigel:

http://www.mccannfiles.com/id178.html

Remember, it was a "filthy animal" who stole it. Not just an ordinary thief or pickpocket. But a "filthy animal". Another question answered before it's been asked.

I guess if you needed to explain to someone why you couldn't produce something that you couldn't possibly have lost, one option would be to say it was stolen.

And if the item(s) was small, and the kind of thing you'd carry in your wallet, you could claim your wallet was stolen.

But if you were going to stage the theft of your wallet, surely you'd remove anything precious first (like photos)?

However, if someone knew you always carried those photos, it'd look suspicious that on this one occasion, the occasion that your wallet was stolen, the precious photos happened to be not in your wallet, so you'd have to think of either a) a way to explain why you'd taken them out of your wallet, b) accept that you'd have to pretend the precious photos were now lost and hide them somewhere, forever or c) claim that they were returned to the address that was indicated inside the wallet on something or other, like your drivers license. But you'd know that thieves aren't renowned for their integrity and people would find it hard to believe that this thief was any different, so you'd be in a bit of a quandry - but only because of the individual/s who knows those photos are always in your wallet. However, if the only person/people who know about the photos are trustworthy, you'd just remove the photos and tell them to keep their mouths shut.

But, if the person/people who knew the photos were in your wallet (like the wife of the wallet owner, for example) isn't someone who can be trusted to keep their mouth shut, OR is someone the wallet owner doesn't want knowing there's something in the wallet that needs to be disappeared... and retaining the photos is vitally important, the only option is to claim that the thief returned the photos. And seeing as this thief is so ethical and thoughtful, you might as well have him/her return the damned wallet, too and a few other bits and pieces (what else was returned? I can't remember... was it credit cards and Euros or something?).

So. I'm wondering if whatever needed to be 'lost' via the staged wallet theft, may only be known by the wallet-owner himself... and the staging of the wallet theft may not have been to avoid police questions about some dodgy item or other, but wife questions.

What think thee?

Monday July 2,2007
By Padraic Flanagan in Praia da Luz
http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/3jul7/Express-02-07-07.htm

Gerry's Wallet

Precious photographs of missing Madeleine McCann were back with her father Gerry last night after his stolen wallet was sent back to him.

The family revealed yesterday that the wallet, containing two irreplaceable photographs of the kidnapped four-year-old, was returned in the past few days.

It had been stolen from Gerry’s pocket by a thief on June 22 only an hour after he had arrived in London to help with the hunt for Madeleine, who was snatched 60 days ago. It contained two unpublished pictures showing Madel­eine aged 15 months and another taken more recently.
The photographs were so precious to Gerry, 39, he always kept them with him and he was distraught at losing them.
His sister described the theft as a “demoralising” sign of the times and urged the thief to return the wallet. “I hope whoever took the wallet is so ashamed when they realise what they’ve just done that they get those pictures back to
us as soon as possible,” said Philomena McCann.

It’s a bit of good news, which we haven’t had for some time


Late last week, the wallet was sent back anonymously to the McCann’s Leicestershire home.

The £100 that Gerry, a specialist heart doctor, had just taken from a cash machine at Waterloo when the thief struck, was not inside.

The leather wallet was then returned to Gerry on Friday by friends visiting the family in Praia da Luz, Portugal. Gerry said yest­er­day: “It had been re­turn­ed, needless to say minus the sterling, although all my cards and 30 euros were still in it. It is good to have my driving licence back.

“But the photographs are the most important things. I’m so glad to have got them back.”

The package was postmarked June 22, the day the wallet was stolen. There was no note inside.

Brian Kennedy, Madeleine’s great uncle, said: “From what we can tell, it was posted about 8.15pm on the evening it was stolen. Either someone with a conscience had realised who they had stolen it from and decided to return it, or it was discarded by the thief and sent to us by someone who found it.

“It’s a bit of good news, which we haven’t had for some time.”

Gerry and wife Kate, 38, with two-year-old twins Sean and Amelie, have been staying at an apartment a few doors from the holiday flat from which Madeleine was taken on May 3.

But yesterday, they were finalising plans to move to a nearby private villa, where they will lead the campaign to find Madeleine and other missing children.

The couple were being helped by friends packing boxes for the move, including thousands of ­letters sent by well-wishers .

Gerry said: “We have confirmed our new accommodation and will be moving in the next few days. We seem to have acquired a lot more stuff, particularly the twins with lots of well-wishers sending them toys.

“We will be staying on in Portugal for the immediate future and we’re determined to come home with Madeleine.”

Iris wrote:Remember, it was a "filthy animal" who stole it. Not just an ordinary thief or pickpocket. But a "filthy animal". Another question answered before it's been asked.

But it was a filthy animal ............. a Flying Pig!

Why didnt the thief take the euros as well????? Not difficult to change to sterling!!!
I dont believe this story one bit!

Iris wrote:Remember, it was a "filthy animal" who stole it. Not just an ordinary thief or pickpocket. But a "filthy animal". Another question answered before it's been asked.

This was auntie Phils way of pre empting the fact the card may later have been found to have been used to access "filthy websites" IMHO
They could easily argue that we warned you a "filthy animal" had stolen it way back in 2007.
How did he not know he simply had not dropped it in the street ?

Or had it already been used to pay for 'filthy websites"????