Woman found guilty of harassing Madeleine McCann’s parents

A woman who repeatedly claimed to be Madeleine McCann was found guilty of harassing the missing girl’s family but was cleared of a more serious stalking charge.

Julia Wandelt and her supporter Karen Spragg, who was acquitted of all charges, were accused of launching a “harassment campaign” against Kate and Gerry McCann that lasted, in Wandelt’s case, more than two years.

Wandelt, 24, of Lubin, Poland, was found guilty of the lesser charge of harassment and sentenced to six months in prison, which he had already served as he had been in custody since February.

The McCanns said in a statement that despite the guilty verdict, they “took no pleasure in the outcome”.

In the statement, the McCanns said they did not want to go through the court process, but the decision to prosecute was made by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) based on the evidence collected by the police.

“We hope that Ms Wandelt will receive the appropriate care and support she needs and that any vulnerability will not be exploited by others,” they said.

“If anyone has new evidence regarding Madeleine’s disappearance, please pass it on to the police.”

Wandelt was sentenced to prison at a hearing at Leicester Crown Court on Friday.

In her speech at sentencing, Mrs Justice Cutts said she accepted the Polish national “did not have an easy childhood”.

But he said family history “does not justify the way you behaved.”

“In this case it has been confirmed that you are not Madeleine McCann,” he said.

“There was no proper or logical basis for this.”

The judge said the McCanns “were entitled to leave the matter to the police and to refuse to meet you, especially in the distressing circumstances in which they lived”.

He added: “Your constant pestering and pestering and finally turning up at their home address on a dark evening in December was uncalled for.”

The judge also made a restraining order banning Wandelt and Ms Spragg, 61, of Caerau Court Road, Cardiff, from contacting the McCanns, visiting Leicestershire or publishing any publications concerning the family.

Wandelt’s order will remain in effect indefinitely or until further decision is made, while Ms. Spragg’s order will remain in effect for five years.

The trial heard Wandelt claimed to be Madeleine, whose disappearance during a family holiday to Portugal in 2007 has never been solved since 2022.

The results of DNA testing following his arrest in February this year “proved conclusively” that he was not the missing child, but during cross-examination Wandelt told the court he was still “50-50” on his identity.

The hearing heard Wandelt had previously claimed two other children were missing before claiming to be Madeleine.

While testifying, he told the jury that his memories of his childhood were limited and that he “could only recall abuse after his experiences with his step-grandfather.”

In June 2022, he began reaching out to the McCann family through Glenfield Hospital, where Madeleine’s parents worked, and subsequently through the Metropolitan Police investigation into the missing child.

Police investigated Wandelt’s claims and called her to “reassure” her that she was not Madeleine, but the contact led to an attempt to reach the McCanns directly, whose personal details were included in a leaked Portuguese police dossier and published online, the court heard.

The court was told Ms McCann was then “bombarded” with more than 60 calls and messages in one day.

On another occasion, Mr McCann told the court, “she responded with something like ‘You’re not Madeleine'”.

He said allegations such as that Wandelt “pulled your heartstrings” were “damaging” the search for his daughter.

The court heard Wandelt contacted Madeleine’s younger siblings Amelie and then Sean via social media, and by February 2025 family friends and colleagues (including the church priest) had all received communications.

But attempts to pressure the McCanns for DNA testing weren’t just made from a distance.

Wandelt attended a memorial service for Madeleine, where the organizer attempted to pass an envelope to Madeleine’s great-aunt Janet Kennedy.

He said he “tried to remain polite and calm” but told the jury he was “stunned” by the approach.

The court heard Ms Kennedy then tore up the letter.

Det Con Mark Draycott, who learned that Wandelt had visited the vigil and then visited Charing Cross police station to have DNA taken (which was later destroyed), told the hearing that he called Wandelt a second time and said “absolutely” it was not Madeleine.

He said he could face harassment charges if he returned to Leicestershire.

The conversation played in court was recorded without Det Con Draycott’s knowledge, heard by the jury and uploaded to a YouTube crime podcast with Wandelt.

Prosecutor Michael Duck KC said Ms Spragg, of Caerau Court Road, Cardiff, had established an online relationship with Wandelt around this time to support her claims and “conspiracy theories”.

The court heard a WhatsApp conversation between Wandelt and Ms Spragg in November 2024 included jokes about the McCanns going through the bins and stealing cutlery from the restaurant they visited to collect DNA.

Giving evidence from behind a privacy screen, Ms McCann testified that she was distressed after being greeted in her driveway by the defendants in December 2024, who begged for DNA testing.

He said he felt “invaded in his own home” as Mr McCann, who arrived shortly afterwards, told the court: “It brings back so many terrible memories of when the media camped outside our house.”

Wandelt, Dr. in the USA. Phil appeared on his show; Prosecutors said this kept his public profile high and they planned to make more media appearances on his return to the UK, but instead both defendants were arrested in February 2025.

During cross-examination, Wandelt said he was still “50-50” on being Madeleine, even though DNA testing conducted by police following the arrests proved conclusively that she was not Madeleine.

When told of the results at HMP Peterborough on April 1 this year, he questioned the authenticity of the DNA results and demanded to see “all the paperwork”.