Madeleine McCann Books

Well, I've sent CH an e-mail asking for confirmation that a book is imminent and this is her reply.

"Yes, the book will be available to the public in a few days

My site will also be updated by then".

Nice one Freedom, thank u x

Freedom wrote:Well, I've sent CH an e-mail asking for confirmation that a book is imminent and this is her reply.

"Yes, the book will be available to the public in a few days

My site will also be updated by then".

Well done, thanks for the update

Chelsea Hoffman ‏@CHProfiler · 24m24 minutes ago

Exclusive (never-before-seen) interview in upcoming Madeleine #McCann book, points to where her body may be found! #ComingSoon

Jeez, that was quick lol!

I've just downloaded the book from Amazon. I know from reading on FB that CH believes in neglect.

Could you give a link please, Mo?

I've only found this page.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Chelsea-Hoffman/e/B0042TR3OG/ref=sr_tc_2_0?qid=1470560100&sr=1-2-ent

There you go!

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Disappearance-Madeleine-McCann-really-happened-ebook/dp/B01JVLAYP4/ref=sr_1_5?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1470561547&sr=1-5&keywords=The+disappearance+of+Madeleine+McCann

Don't bother downloading peeps - it's c-r-a-p!

Well, that's a quick verdict!

Could you give us a brief synopsis of what conclusions are reached?

Can download to Kindle for free, so shall give it a whirl, as there's nothing to lose.

There are supposedly 824 pages to this book but they are not standard pages. CH lists the 48 questions put to KM which takes up 4 pages.

The book is not factually correct, it jumps from GA's book to MSM and then brings in newspaper cuttings of other cases. There is nothing new and nothing libellous in the book, which I should have realised before purchasing. Quite frankly there is more information on the forums than in this so called book. I will wait to read GA's second book, after all the only people who know the truth are the PJ, OG and of course the McCanns.

Sorry forgot to add there is no conclusion, here is a copy of the last paragraphs -

I think it’s about time that Kate and Gerry McCann came forward and admit that their actions on that night in 2007 facilitated Maddie’s disappearance. I think it’s time that this family acknowledge the role that they did indeed play (at the least) in this tragic incident. On the other hand, I can’t help but wonder why Kate and Gerry seem so convinced that leaving their children unsupervised didn’t contribute to Madeleine’s disappearance. This is just speculation, but perhaps Kate and Gerry believe this way, because they know what actually caused Madeleine’s disappearance? At any rate, there is no shame in admitting that you’re not a perfect parent. It’s time that Kate and Gerry at least admit that much. People make mistakes all the time, and if Madeleine McCann was truly kidnapped by an intruder, and Kate and Gerry truly have nothing to hide, then why not admit to the world that they made a regretful decision on that fateful night? Do they not have any regret? I also believe it’s time for Kate and Gerry to abandon any lawsuits associated with this case. I don’t understand how they can get away with suing people for expressing their thoughts on the case especially when those thoughts are based in evidence and the behavior of Kate and Gerry. I think, their time would be better spent actually searching for Madeleine, instead of searching for ways to manipulate the public in to accepting their sides of the
story. That’s especially since they’ve actually done nothing but be uncooperative with efforts to find Madeleine and get to the bottom of what happened to her. They’ve refused to answer numerous questions, and refuse to get a polygraph yet they expect the entire world to lay at their feet in acceptance of the “Madeleine was kidnapped. Nothing to see here, folks,” rhetoric. Truth be told, there has been at least one incident where Kate McCann appeared to express guilt for leaving her children alone. However, she still clarified (at the time) that she believes Madeleine would have disappeared under other circumstances, and that she’d still feel guilt. In a way, she still would not acknowledge that regardless of whether Madeleine was harmed or kidnapped leaving her without their supervision made it absolutely possible. Also troubling to me, is the fact that Kate McCann has been made an “ambassador” for the British Missing People organization. Meanwhile, there are mothers of children missing for far longer who haven’t been made ambassador. Kerry Needham comes to mind, a woman who has endured the horrifying pain of having a lost child for more than twenty years. Her son, Ben Needham, vanished while on the Greek island of Kos. Like Maddie, this child has never been found. I can tell you a huge difference between Kerry Needham and Kate McCann socalled Missing People ambassador. There has never been evidence against the woman in her own son’s tragic disappearance. The same absolutely cannot be said about Kate. That’s why I think Kate should show a little grace, and stop soaking in the spotlight while she knows that more than half of the people who know about this case hold her responsible for it. I think it’s time for her to abandon that role as ambassador,and leave it open to mothers of missing children who aren’t under intense scrutiny by the public and detectives. The fact that this woman is an ambassador for missing people, is a slap in the face to those who are actually searching for answers in their children’s cases.

Mo, was there anything in it that you didn't know?

Didn't the pre publicity refer to new interviews?

I tried to buy it this morning but there was a problem with my card. After your comments, even though the card problem is sorted, I will probably save myself the £3.77.

the only interview I have seen is 4 pages with Steven Birch

There are 6 pages of forum theories -

I don't recall Kate saying this in her statement:
Kate claims that she had closed all the windows prior to going out with Gerry on that evening. She immediately brought this detail to the attention of authorities when Madeleine was reported missing under the assumption that she was kidnapped by some unknown predator. At the time, it wasn’t known that this little detail would soon become a piece of evidence against Kate and Gerry McCann.

I certainly don't recall this:

It’s reported that when Kate McCann alerted her friends to the disappearance of her daughter, Jane Tanner immediately made a remark that has long been scrutinized and debated:
“Oh my God. I saw a man carrying a girl.”

Did Tanner really say this? Did she really even see anything at all? Or was this a detail that had been fabricated to shift suspicion off of the party of adults who left the children unattended? Whatever the answer may be, authorities ruled out the alleged sighting by 2013. There could be many reasons for the sighting being stricken from the investigation.

I don't recall the Amazon link to the book being posted before?

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Truth-Out-There-Madeleine-ebook/dp/B01GG1HY4Q/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1470647331&sr=1-3&keywords=madeleine+mccann

How can anyone take Stephen Birch seriously?

http://us.blastingnews.com/news/2016/08/new-madeleine-mccann-book-reveals-possible-location-of-child-s-body-001053835.html

Here is what is now on CH's website.

The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: What really happened?


It’s been nearly 10 years since the disappearance of British child, Madeleine McCann. Crime writer Chelsea Hoffman takes an analytical look at this international mystery, by comparing other missing children’s cases from around the world. The first major book published on this case in many years, The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: What really happened? is a critical look at the evidence that has been produced in this case, against the missing child’s parents, along with theories of what could have happened to the little girl.


EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW inside:

Chelsea Hoffman interviews someone who believes he may know where the body of Madeleine McCann is going to be found. This never-before-seen interview, within the book, sheds light on a possible government cover up in the disappearance of little Madeleine, along with a breaking update in the search for Madeleine, that has not yet been covered in British mainstream media. Will this individual be Maddie’s saving grace? Read The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann: What really happened? to find out!

This book made me want to enrol with the grammar police. Even though I was watching Olympic coverage as I read this book, despite the distraction of the synchronised swimming, I noticed many mistakes of style, grammar and layout. And that was apart from the factual mistakes. Getting a fact wrong in a book of this kind when there is an independent source is inexcusable.

Clearly the book had no editor or even the help of a friend who is good at spotting a missed apostrophe, comma or duplicated word in the same sentence.

I would also feel that the book was uploaded by Chelsea herself as some pages are not laid out properly.

The book is sloppy. She says the tapas group were all in their own’ villas.’ A few lines later she refers to their ‘apartments’ which is a quite different thing, and the correct description of the holiday accommodation.

She refers to the McCann's apartment being 120 meters (US spelling) from the tapas bar and then later refers to it being 400 ft (which is equivalent) but why change from meters to feet?

She refers to the twins as’ infant babies’ and later just as ‘babies.’ They were 2 years and three months old on that holiday – not babies. Later in the book she states they were 18 months old, but that is hardly a ‘baby.’ Getting their ages wrong when their dates of birth are available is inexcusable.


Constantly I wanted to call in the grammar police. So many words that should be separate are run together.
Examples: wined and dined becomes winedanddined; so to speak becomes sotospeak.

Some dreadful phrases -

Of the possibility that the McCanns gave their children prescribed drugs to keep them asleep while they dined, she says that this was ‘incredibly illegal.’ The word incredibly is unnecessary in this context.

The omission of relevant facts is annoying.

She doesn’t mention the availability of the free evening crèche included in the holiday package or that the nannies who already knew the children would babysit for an hourly charge. She just refers to their not hiring a babysitter when it is important to mention the satisfactory options available to them which they chose to disregard. She does comment that as the children were all born as the result of IVF they were very much wanted which made the casual evening arrangements strange. So why not make her point stronger by spelling out the childcare options available to them.

She doesn’t mention the setting up of the secretive limited company (the Fund) and Kate’s commitment to the company being ‘open and transparent whatever it cost.’ As an allegedly experienced crime analyst and profiler shouldn’t she have found it very odd that distraught parents would set up a limited company only a few days after their daughter vanished? She could have copied and pasted a few paragraphs from Enid O’Dowd’s report on the Fund if she could not be bothered to look into the Fund herself. Now did I miss a reference to the Fund when I looked up from my kindle to see the synchronised swimming or is it that she doesn’t think the setting up of the company is of any relevance?

She mentions there was a sighting of a man carrying a child that night around the time Madeleine went missing and this man bore a ‘striking resemblance’ to Gerry McCann. Now while many who follow the saga of missing Madeleine think that one of the efits is somewhat like Gerry McCann, she is the first person to consider it is ‘striking resemblance.’ She does not even name the Smith family who gave the information leading to the efits. She does not really get over that here was a group of nine family member including children who are genuinely independent witnesses.

Incorrect facts

There is no dispute about the time the group met for dinner. The booking was for 8.30pm and statements agree that they all turned up around that time. But Chelsea says the alarm was raised 2 ½ to 3 hours after the meal started which bring the alarm to 11 pm -11.30pm. Kate found her daughter missing someone between 9.45 pm and 10 pm. How could you get mixed up here?

The worst clanger comes in her conclusions at the end. Writing about the McCanns leaving their children alone in a holiday apartment she writes:
‘This was a holiday apartment which faced a street, that was left unsecured with two unsupervised children inside of it.’

TWO unsupervised children! Two! Chelsea I want my £3.77 back. I should have listened to Mo.

Thank you to Mo and Antonia for your synopsis of the book. It is bizarre how Chelsea could get such basic facts so wrong, when she has been on this case for so long. I certainly won't bother with it.

Antonia bravo for your description of the book. You have reviewed it far better than I could The only thing now is nearly everyone is singing its praises on HiDeHo FB. Earlier I read 4 reviews on Amazon, 3 giving it 4*- 1 giving 2*.

I'm glad you've read it I was beginning to think I was just being sour grapes

Mo, thanks for your kind words.

The Summers and Swan book is a more professional production in terms of style, grammar, layout etc.

Maybe I should have been kinder - Chelsea does raise the bizarre situation whereby Kate is an Ambassador for Missing People, and she writes about McCanns doubters being called trolls - things that need to be said.  But why not wait to make this a better book with appropriate help with editing and design and fact checking - there was no approaching deadline relevant to publication.

There are people with a little doubt who don't want to read a heavy academic tome - perhaps this light short book might be attractive to them and lead them to read more? Not everybody would get uptight about the writing skills of Ms Hoffman. I admit I went to an old fashioned English grammar school and got the top grade in my 'O' level English Language paper......

I'm a grammar school girl too so hi there!

I am a self-confessed pedantic old git so the factual errors and awful presentation would annoy me.

It's not entirely bad; I agree with Antonia that it might be of interest to people who want something light to start off with.

Thanks for that Antonia - excellent stuff.

She's not doing herself any favours, nor is she helping anyone to understand the McCann case, with an unprofessionally-presented book like this. If she wants credibility, the first place to start would be to pay someone to edit her book for both content and grammar, and then to really pay attention to the facts and to make sure the details were scrupulously double-checked - in order to avoid the clangers noted above. All that will happen now is that people will dismiss her as a wannabe writer, wannabe criminalist, wannabe attention-seeker with a very poor grasp of what it means to actually research and write about a subject professionally. Unfortunately. Because I think there might have been some potential there to be a person of influence, given who follows her. But not with a product like this.