Madeleine v CEOP on the Wayback Machine

This topic has been split into sections due to the number of graphics required.

Around Tue 16 June 2017, an entry went up on Facebook. It claimed that an Internet archive, the Wayback Machine (WM) had captured a page from CEOP (Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre) showing that Madeleine was missing. The page captured is dated as 30 April 2007, when Madeleine disappeared on 3 May 2007. In summary, the CEOP page was 3 days too early.

After that, things got interesting.

The technical experts locked horns on whether this was real or an error. Non-technical people took views, whether well informed or not.

A poll on the Jill Havern forum showed that nearly half the people were lost in the techno-speak battleground, therefore I am choosing to write this post very deliberately in language that is as non-technical as I can make it.

Let me begin at the beginning.

The Internet Archive, aka the Wayback Machine (WM), is a fairly small, not for profit organisation based in California. It tries to act as an Internet ‘library’ by copying sites at various points in time. It does this by using automated ‘crawlers’ to look up sites automatically, given that this is much easier than having real people do it by hand.

You, personally, can go to a site and try to save a copy by hand. Sometimes it works, and sometimes it doesn’t. WM has the same sort of issues – some things copy and some things don’t.

I’d like now to swap to Q&A mode, because that allows me to take things easy step by easy step.

Q1. What happened?

The WM result for what is supposed to be 30 Apr 2007 looks like this.

CEOP 20070430

It shows a date of 30 Apr 2007, but news stories from October 2007, suggesting something is broken.

A key point here is that it is showing a reference to Madeleine disappearing, some 3 days before she officially disappeared.

Q2. Why has none of this appeared on the news?

The story has appeared in many Internet forums and generated intense debate. It appears to be not worthy of column inches or airtime in major media outlets.

Q3. How could WM get the results wrong for a McCann page on 30 Apr 2007?

It is a CEOP page with a missing Madeleine reference 3 days before Madeleine disappeared.

At this stage, you have precisely two options.

Option 1. The WM is wrong, whether it is broken or otherwise.

Option 2. The WM is accurate, and CEOP knew Madeleine would go missing before she went missing.

Let me explore option 2 for a while, which is that CEOP had some sort of information on Madeleine’s disappearance 3 days before she disappeared.

This leads me to straight to conspiracy theory. The Internet is awash with comments that it means Madeleine was due to be killed, which it most certainly does not. If correct, it would mean CEOP was ready to put out a missing child post 3 days before she went missing.

So that would mean CEOP is involved in a conspiracy, as is the WM, a California based organisation, which is cleaning up this entry.

Option 1 is technical bug. Option 2 is global conspiracy. This may explain why major news sites are not reporting the incident. Or perhaps they are part of the conspiracy.

Please read the rest of this article before you decide.


14 thoughts on “Madeleine v CEOP on the Wayback Machine

  1. Your two options need expanding. The third option is Madeleine was already dead on 29 April, and that the death needed to be concealed for some reason by the government. Therefore between 29th April and 3rd May a fabricated abduction was planned. CEOP was involved in helping to fabricate an abduction tale due to a possible accidental death. Not that they knew she was going to go missing. There was no abduction.

    • This takes us into a different conspiracy theory, another that requires the co-operation of large slices of the people who worked in the Ocean Club, faked Ocean Club records, visitors to the OC who were in a position to verify that Madeleine was alive on 3rd May, at least until high tea time. After that is debatable.

      By the time we hit this, we have got something excruciating complex, involves a lot of people, potential leaks everywhere, and guess what?

      Despite the fact that Luz is awash with dodgy rumour after dodgy rumour about what happened to Madeleine, know one is pushing a government cover-up of this nature. There is a lot of spleen vented that the McCanns got much more than their fair share of high-level support, but the actual cover-up rumour has not surfaced.


      Should it turn out to be a conspiracy, it still needs, at this point in time (2015), the collusion of 3 parties – CEOP, the Wayback Machine in California, and the media.

      Edit. Having thought this through, Richard’s comment is correct. I omitted the possibility that something happened and that CEOP reacted, as opposed to CEOP knew and acted in advance.

      My thanks to Richard for posting this insight.

    • In my opinion, there is no support for Madeleine disappearing before the evening of 3 May 2007.

      The Wayback/CEOP error is somewhat irrelevant to this. The data shows that an error occurred in Wayback months or years after 3 May 2007, and that error aggregated a lot of data into a time slot a few days before Madeleine vanished. It increases the chance of Madeleine going missing earlier, because as it is a computer glitch only, there is no need to include CEOP in a grand collusion.

      With that out of the way, if Madeleine vanished before that evening, it becomes necessary to have a conspiracy of greater and greater proportions the earlier she disappeared.

      At the minimum, David Payne would need to be involved, re his visit to 5A to check on Kate.

      If earlier still, the nannies looking after Madeleine that day have to be involved. Someone has to forge entries in the childcare records, parents who attended the high teas have to be involved, staff who took mini-tennis or sailing have to be involved.

      We are well into conspiracy theories developed by other bloggers and discussed on various forums. I simply cannot see how such a vast movement could be co-ordinated before the JP got a copy of various records and interviewed staff.

      There are other reasons for my disbelief. There was a huge reward on offer at the time, and not a single peripheral player (one keeping gob shut but otherwise not involved) came forward. There have been appeals promising anonymity, yet nothing has emerged.

      The bottom line, IMO, is that Madeleine disappeared in the evening of 3 May 2007, I have no evidence to support a time before Gerry’s check a little after 9pm. I have no evidence to support the idea that Madeleine died in the apartment, and equally, none to show that she did not. Hence my repeated use of vanished or disappeared.

  2. I would like to point out that your posts about the WBM are about and do not mention the actual page that was captured – There is a big difference. I designed websites at that time and one of the things we would do was upload it to somewhere only we knew the name of (mccann.html) and check it all worked and looked good before releasing it to either the client or making it “go live” – this would not have needed a whole lot of people (and certainly not needed anyone from WBM, they came along later and deleted THEIR data, which we saw). It could have been just one person, call him Jimmy, or Jimmy Bett, if you wish

    • The way WordPress operates, a first comment always has to be approved prior to publication.

      After 1st approval, WordPress assumes following comments using the same contact details should be approved.

      Basically, I need to approve comment #1. After that, if I don’t like a comment, I have the power to remove it after publication.

      Welcome to my blog. I publish, or leave up, comments which are civil and within the law.

      To date, I am pleased to say 100% (of the non-spam kind) have passed this requirement, therefore all have been published.

  3. I’m just dropping this in here as I am not certain it’s been discussed.

    The CEOPS Wayback Machine is not the only evidence that Madeleine disappeared earlier than is claimed. Firstly, the photographs produced by the McCanns to prove Madeleine had still been around over the weekend preceding her disappearance have clearly been edited, cropped & in some cases obviously photoshopped, such as in this case –

    That’s not all. The night that the Police were called to PDL, they arrived within an hour. For some reason, the McCanns were unable to supply a tooth or hair brush & within a couple of days Gerry had flown back to the UK to gather hair strands from Madeleines pillow back home. Once a search was completed, only five peoples DNA could be identified from hairs found in the Apt 5A from which Madeleine is said to have disappeared on the night of her disappearance. None of them were childrens hairs & no DNA from could be found whatsoever. That means three kids running around in this apartment for a week dropped zero hairs. –

    Some months later Cadaver & Blood dogs found evidence that Madeleine had died in the apartment after all. This evidence was extremely degraded due to the heavy duty cleaning fluids that had been used to clean up the mess back when it happened. Seeing the Police found no sign of blood & no evidence of harm in Apt 5A it must be assumed that somehow Madeleine was injured & killed in Apt 5A but that all & any evidence of what had happened had been very, very thoroughly cleaned up before the Police were called. Again, only hairs from the McCanns & three of their friends could be found & identified.

    It does not strike me as feasible, nor reasonable under the circumstances, that the McCanns had enough time between the moment they claim Madeleine was abducted & the arrival of the Police an hour later to so completely sterilise their apartment that not a single piece of DNA from Madeleine nor her two siblings could be found. Bear in mind that blood & cadaverine (a very distinctive & long-lasting smell) had also been cleaned up because otherwise it would have been spotted at the time or it would never have been found months later.

    If we assume that some sort of deep clean was performed in Apt 5A to remove evidence of Madeleines death & that only months later was blood & cadaver found in the grout between the tiles behind the sofa in Apt 5A, this might also explain why no toothbrush for Madeleine could be provided by the McCanns for a DNA test. Another piece of the puzzle slips neatly into place.

    As no-one else could possibly have left blood & DNA evidence at the scene of Madeleines disappearance it seems pretty obvious that she died in that apartment. Given that the worlds media has been fibbing about this of this case for years & even Scotland Yard claims to still be searching for an abductor who never existed, I for one have no problem believing in the sort of vast conspiracy the establishment are clearly capable of… P*zzag*te, Dunblane, Jill Dando, Haut de la Garrenne, Jimmy Savile, Elm Guest House, Ted Heath, Leon Brittan, Greville Janner, Cyril Smith, Sir Anthony Blunt etc etc etc etc…

  4. Did anyone actually try the wayback link for themselves or were you just using the circulated screen grab? Go there now and you’ll see you can’t get back to that date. Also try enlarging the area around where the screengrab says ’11 captures’ and look at the heavy jpeg artifacts close to the text and how a little further out the white background is clear of these…do the same to the black bars of the graph showing number of captures and see how the left hand bar indicating an April capture is a different colour to the following ones. Is it more likely someone has doctored a screengrab or someone has ‘got’ to wayback and doctored their data?

    • The material I captured was done by myself. It was done in the few days after this story broke. It was easy to foresee that WM would clean up the situation by removing the corrupt data and my intention was to depict what the picture looked like prior to such a correction. WM did indeed clean it up as predicted, so what WM currently reports for that period is not what it was reporting then.

      For all I know, it may be possible to use the WM to look at self-captures in order to see if it captured anything relevant around the corruption date. However, I really don’t have enough interest to try this out.

      The WM got corrupted. The WM got fixed. Simple.

  5. Oh – and even more clearly – WB marks the month you are looking at as red on the bar graph. The circulated screen grab has all the bars as black… case closed.

    • It wasn’t just a screen grab – the whole folder was grabbed which included all the code – it WASNT doctored – the date is hard-coded into the HTML and JAVA – it’s all still available on one of the firms

      • Has WBM always used the red bar to indicate the month being viewed? If this is a new thing the other jpeg aberrations are perhaps debatable… but if it’s always used that then the grab I’m looking at has all black bars…making it v.suspect…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s