And I will continue to refuse to believe it even if they are convicted ...

WHEN IT comes to the disappearance of Madeleine McCann and the subsequent plight of her parents, I honestly can’t remember another news story that has obsessed the Great British Public quite so much – not even the death of Diana, of which more later.

Everyone has a theory: the pasty-serving woman in Greggs, the petrol-dispensing woman at the garage, the ironing-and-cleaning woman in bed next to me – everyone thinks they know what happened and when. So why shouldn’t I have a go?

Well, as if having to fly home on EasyJet wasn’t hard enough on poor Kate and Gerry, they are now having to endure more diabolical speculation that they killed poor Maddy. Why? Because of so-called “DNA evidence”. This is nothing short of ludicrous. Now I’m no forensic expert, but I happen to know that everyone has DNA. So how can we be sure it was Maddy’s?

Apparently the latest crackpot theory is that some boffin in a Birmingham laboratory says it might be. How inappropriate to apply science to a situation of such raw emotion. Are we expected to believe that the McCanns, who have touched everyone with their incredible sang-froid and poker-faced resilience despite the abduction and possible death of their daughter, could have done anything to harm sweet Maddy just on the basis of cold, hard science?

Who are these faceless ghouls in white coats playing with their test tubes and bunsen burners when their time could be better spent helping the poor McCanns in their indefatigable hunt for their little girl?

I don’t know what the doctors do in Portugal, and frankly I do not wish to know, but someone should tell the Portimao plod that British doctors aren’t murderers. And before anyone cries ‘Shipman’, may I point out that there’s an exception to every rule, and seeing as Harold Shipman has already proved himself the exception to that particular rule, it means that the McCanns couldn’t possibly have killed their daughter. If only the Portuguese police could apply such logic they might have found Maddy by now. My instincts tell me that the McCanns are innocent, and I trust my instincts far more than any foreign police force or hairbrained scientist.

The McCanns deserve our respect and admiration for standing strong and continuing to insist that their daughter has been abducted, in spite of a lack of supporting evidence and an uncaring Portuguese police force preoccupied with solving crimes. I’m sorry, but I refuse to believe the McCanns had anything to do with Maddy’s disappearance, and I will continue to refuse to believe it even if they are convicted of murder in a court of law. Even if they confess, it will only be so they can get all of this nonsense out of the way and resume the search for Maddy from their police cells. Such a confession would only act as a beacon of their innocence and decency.

I’m sure I speak for everyone at dinner parties up and down the country when I say: “Don't worry, Kate and Gerry. We believe in you and everything you say, except when you say something that isn’t true just because it will help in the search of Maddy, who we know you couldn’t have possibly killed.” I trust that’s clear.

BUT WAIT a minute. How about this for a theory, as discussed in an internet chatroom: We know that Maddy was conceived using IVF. We know that she is a beautiful little blonde girl. Does she remind you of anyone? Princess Diana when she was a girl, perhaps? And the rant begins …

“It is well known that Diana wanted a daughter. What if she had some eggs frozen that were then used years later BY MISTAKE? What if Kate McCann has given birth to the heir to the throne, and then MI6 and the Royal Family have found out and have abducted Maddy and took her away and now, unhappy with the publicity, they are fitting the parents up with the crime - IS IT ANY COINCIDENCE that the charges are being brought just around the 10th anniversary of Diana's death and the anniversary of the September 11th attacks as well?

“I would wage good money the Masons are involved too …”

The internet is a wonderful thing, but the quicker they introduce an intelligence test that people have to pass before they’re allowed to log on, the better.

I WAS fascinated by the story of David and Jean Davidson, both in their seventies, who have done a full Partridge and now live permanently at a Travelodge on the A1 near Grantham.

Mr Davidson says: “This is our home. We have everything we need here and the staff are like family now. We don't get hit with huge heating bills and it’s safer than a lot of places these days.”

The couple also like the disabled access and the convenient Little Chef across the 41-space car park.

Two questions occur to me. Firstly, where do they go on their wedding anniversary? A Hilton Express? And secondly, why aren’t Travelodge running the country’s care homes? They seem to be able to do it far better and far more cheaply than the corrupt thieves who are supposed to be looking after our old folks.

SPEAKING OF which, I’m sure we’re not the only people to be harassed by a mad old woman who keeps turning up on our doorstep insisting that she still lives here. Usually we just give her a cup of tea while calling the home to come and fetch her.

Credit to Gordon Brown – he invited her in to spend the afternoon with him.

PRODUCT PLACEMENT is big business. Car firms spend fortunes to get their latest model featured in the latest James Bond film; having your mobile phone shown in Mission Impossible is worth millions.

So where does that leave the manufacturers of Cuddle Cats? I don’t know, but I’ve already sold my shares.

SO HAVE you seen the gorilla playing the drums in the Cadbury’s Dairy Milk advert yet? You do realise that it’s Phil Collins in that suit, don’t you?

No, really.