Even as the biggest missing child search in Portuguese history began, the McCanns and their friends were frantically phoning the UK, pleading that no-one was helping them and as British citizens they were demanding all the diplomatic assistance the UK could offer. These frantic demands and condemnation of the third world they found themselves in, were not the result of hours, days or even weeks of lethargy on the party of the Portuguese. These phone calls were being made immediately following the alarm being raised. That is, while the police, the staff from Warners, the local people and holidaymakers were frantically leaving no stone unturned in the immediate vicinity. At a time when Madeleine could have been lying injured under a bush.
The decision not to trust or listen to the local police seems to have been made the night Madeleine disappeared and the negative campaign began straight away. The Portuguese police were to take the brunt of the blame even before they arrived.
Gerry and his friends took control of the investigation that very same night. As the police advised them not to contact the press, they were running off pictures of toddler Maddie in her Christmas party frock and handing them out to passers by. Don't mention Maddie's distinctive eye warned the Portuguese police, 'but it's a good marketing ploy' whined Gerry, and went ahead with his LOQK FOR ME campaign anyway.
Fascinating to observe, I have to say, never in my entire life have I seen suspects in a major crime launch and manage a separate investigation to the police. An investigation supported by their government and paid for with public donations. So unique and bizarre is this case, that I am still here nearly 8 years on.
On 22nd May 2007, while the official Portuguese investigation was very much underway, the public were being asked to send their holiday pictures to CEOP and Jim Gamble, and the NPIA were asking for anyone with information to contact them. The official police meanwhile, the Police Judiciary (PJ) were being inundated with thousands of sightings of little blond girls all over the globe by nutters stirred up by the excitement created by Team McCann. Even the press were joining in, helpfully pushing Robert Murat forward as a suspect. There were many things the PJ could have done better, and they have acknowledged that, but in fairness, they were also being sent on hundreds of wild goose chases and the main witnesses were not co-operating. They were too busy running their own investigation.
 |
| Phew, not arguidos anymore |
Are there any lessons to be learned? Hell yeh. Should parents of a missing child be allowed to conduct their own investigation, in Portugal or indeed, here in the UK. Well yes, of course they should, I don't believe in banning anything. Should they be supported by their government and public money to continue such a charade is another question altogether. Nearly 8 years on this case still remains unsolved.
Kate has the nerve to say they were non-functioning! Most people would have been frozen with fear about what had befallen their child. Evidently deleting messages, scribbling time-lines, phoning relatives/friends, and all the other devious goings on were far more important than searching "in the dark" for their child. It's a good job other searcher's weren't of the same mind. Strange that their first thought's on finding Madeleine not in her bed were...She must have got out and be absolutely petrified wandering around in the DARK!!!
ReplyDeleteFrom the very beginning they should have been kept as far away from the investigation as possible, and only informed of what was necessary. No way should they have been allowed to demand anything. I'll never believe they had nothing to do with Madeleine's disappearance no matter how they, and their supporters, try to hoodwink people into thinking otherwise.
Cristobell, I think I'll have a break from this for a while. It's been infuriating me for sometime now, that no news of a breakthrough seems imminent at the moment, It's like being in a bloody maze with no way out.
Thank you for allowing me to vent my feelings on your excellent blog.
Scotland Yard/OG and all its odd little counterparts are looking for a body, the only problem is, you can lead a horse to water, but you can' t make it drink.
DeleteAndy Redwood has proved to be a bumbling, money wasting disgrace. As economically savvy and as budgarily aware as Broon. With leadership like that we're all doomed. The problem is at least one current cop on Grange is too dense to look in the right place.
Still, Portimao can crack open the Pandora's box any time they choose, and then things really will get nasty. Yet alas, Charlotte flutters her eyelashes and still they refuse to learn. SY that is.
Dough heads, anal retentive, can't investigate their way out of a paper bag, pure, unadulterated British, clueless ( boys in blue) dough heads.
IMO, Operation Grange is one big closed-minded disgrace! Get to number five you simpletons!!!!!
21:18 Redwood is not a bumbling, money-wasting disgrace nor is OG a closed-minded disgrace. They are adhering to an agenda. Namely, to advance the abduction fairy-tale. It seems that OG is coming to an end without it even having found a patsy or patsies. Whatever, once OG is ended, any remote hope of this case been solved will end with it.
DeleteThe only chance of justice for Madeleine MCcann is that she went missing in another country if this would of happened in Leicester or a differant part of england or scotland we would not even heard of her name she she would not even get her face on a carton of milk the only people who might notice she went missing would be the neighbours maybe u could ask your friend Sonia to take her camera crew down to Rothley and interview the next door neighbour instead of Kate and Gerry JUSTICE FOR MADELEINE
ReplyDeleteRob and his mother helped the tragic couple in their hour of need, and then the shysters labelled him a paedophile. Pseudo profilers be damned.
ReplyDeleteThe script sucks, not bad for a bunch of amateurs though, and they'd already had a year to grieve. Nice and honest of you there, Johnny boy.
My belief is: the reason why so many people assisted with the rewritten narrative is because they were too selfish and insensitive to offer much needed help in the first place.
ReplyDeletePeople should have helped Kate when she needed it, everybody knows Gerald's in his own conceited world, ham acting fools.
I presume helping Kate when she needed it, was prior to Madeleine's disappearance, and if so, I couldn't agree more.
DeleteKate could not cope with the three toddlers, that much is clear. The macho man on the bus who said 'fuck off, I'm not here to enjoy myself' had been given a lecture on pulling his weight and helping out with the kids, and he wasn't having it - he sat apart from Kate and the kids. He didn't want to play mummies and daddies, he wanted to go OUT to play with his mates.
His attitude towards family clearly tore Kate's fantasy world apart, the perfect life Kate wanted with her husband and children is described in her book, the thoughtful husband, the perfectly behaved kids, and like the fantasy it is, it bears no resemblance to reality.
The baby and toddler years are the most stressful for any marriage, babies don't fix things, they break them. Womens' refuges are filled with mothers of babies and very young children, because those early years can be especially traumatic.
Despite her claims, Kate is not maternal. At every opportunity she passes the care of her children to other people, the twins were back in the crèche on 4th May! Thereafter, they were cared for by the stream of visitors who went out to join the McCanns on their holiday while Kate and her husband toured Europe. While the other tapas families spent time with their kids in the afternoons, the McCann kids were returned to the crèche, family days were Saturdays, when the crèche was closed.
I'm sure the conceited Gerald was probably having all the 'me' he wanted prior to Madeleine disappearing and I doubt Kate was very happy about it. Far from being a dream family holiday, it was much more likely to have been a nightmare.
Well spelt out cristobell. For many years when watching the Bus episode and listening to bloggers make up ridiculous theories of why he said what he said on the bus I could have lol. To me your analysis is quite correct he looked like a big spoilt kid who when pulled about not pulling weight sat in the corner and huffed. Not only that he was going to let everyone else know how wronged he was. My experience is that this is a very strong characteristic of a very extrovert attention seeking guy that gmcc has been described as. What happens is that this is probably what kate was initially attracted to but when the kids come along this type of behaviour is very difficult to live with, on top of this these types of guys can when it suits them really turn the charm with the kids so the kids end up thinking dads a great guy and mums just there to make everybody's life a misery. In such an environment without lack of real support from the father and a mother who is not overly maternal children become confused and bad behaviour is often the norm. Madeline in my opinion would probably have been displaying learned behaviour from her dad in disrespecting her mum and because of Kate's oblivious lack of materal skills she could not cope with it. Lots of mums can put aside lack of parental support from the father and develop a loving and caring relationship with their children but others spend a lifetime of resentment which sees them rebel against the children. In most cases it does not thank god have the tragic consequences that it had for madaline. Imo after madaline died Kate's guilt made her fall back on old reliable extrovert likeable gerry to g e t them out of this situation. Gmc own guilt has allowed him to continue with the charade
DeleteI think we are very much on the same page 08:17. Gerry believes that he has duped everyone, that we can cannot see his real character, but he couldn't be more wrong. As you point out, guys like this are all around - and in some cultures it is not only acceptable, it is encouraged.
DeleteThe Tapas friends however, were modern parents and the other fathers were hands on. Russell for example, stayed at his apartment to bathe his daughter and wash her sheets after she vomited (we are told) - however, we just KNOW that this is something Gerry would never do, just as the words 'you have a break love, I'll look after the kids' would never come out of his mouth.
Gerry is the 'wee man', the very spoilt youngest brother of doting older siblings. He has led a very charmed life, probably at the cost of those closest to him. His mother looks ravaged, and how on earth does the sister of a cardiologist get to such an enormous size?
As you say, Kate was probably attracted to the 'macho' Gerry, but living with the reality isn't a pleasant experience for anyone. Again, in her book, Kate's anger and real feelings leak out. While their friends enjoy a happy afternoon with their children at the beach, Kate on her own, runs past them, and worries about Madeleine's feelings at being left out. Her husband meanwhile enjoys another tennis lesson - sometimes 3 a day and for a mum struggling with 3 toddlers, that has got to grate.
How often have you set in the office and thought “what crap” as somebody paints the perfect life, with the perfect husband, kids and the marble fireplace only to find other’s wailing about sad their lives are in comparison. People like that are easily fooled and unfortunately while it doesn’t make up the majority of our society it does make up a sizeable percentage. Add to these, we have people who were concerned enough to take an interest but haven’t been drawn to the case like we have and so have taken at face value a good lot of what has been thrown at them by the media and you get a sizeable number of people who the media can sell the “little house on the prairie” story. Whoever advised them on their PR know that they can never fool all the people all the time but they know there is enough people out there that will buy their story and are not to be too concerned about those who don’t. The message from the begining will have been sell the perfect life thats what people want to hear
DeleteOthers like ourselves who have been drawn to the case and others who have experienced personalities like GMC either as children or as spouses can so easily see through it. The signs are there clear to see, the exaggerated public displays of affection (how great a husband am I), the dollies in the pocket in full view (how great a dad am I). However when you study his interviews GMC has never been able to articulate any intimate relationship with Madeline, the crime watch interview was classic (Madeline was almost perfect when she was born) again some of our armchair detectives took this as meaning that Madeline had some sort of illness from birth, what I seen was a man who was trying to portray feelings of overwhelming love that he couldn’t relate to and ended up messing it up. The proud father moment was another. Not saying that he didn’t love his children I think he did but he is like a lot of men out there the overwhelming feelings are for himself and the feelings for others take second place.
I agree with you Cristobell this case will be used by profilers as study material for years to come not because his personality is unique but because this case has given them the opportunity to study how this type of personality operates in a very unique situation. If you look at the early interviews with experienced and respectable journalists, who later distanced themselves from the case for fear of retribution (unlike the daft Kelly) you will see that a lot of their questions were designed to test his inability to articulate overwhelming feelings for the child such as inviting him to describe the last time he saw her or his feelings with regards potential sightings.
13:53, great post, I have read it a couple of times. I feel quite relieved when others can see the same stuff I can! Please do write in more often!
DeleteAs much as sycophants like Lorraine Kelly might lap up every word this pair spout, there are just too many people out there who can see exactly how phoney they are. As you say, Gerry the devoted husband and father, yeh right, and Kate the tragic, grief stricken mother, who manages to portray a unique and serene form of grief that doesn't involve her face crumpling or her mascara running.
Tis the phoniness and the manipulation that sticks in my craw 13:53, cuddle cat peeping out from Kate's rucksack as she attends the police station. The sudden religious fervour, the handholding, the togetherness, Gerry's epiphany (ffs) and Kate's off with the fairies, sighs.
They are both narcissistic imo 13:35, which is a real sadness for Madeleine, the 'black sheep' of narcissistic mothers endure traumatic childhoods. Gerry is the dominant character, he is a logical thinker and has no doubt planned, wormed and manipulated himself out of tricky situations his entire life. Those are probably the traits that Kate found attractive, she likes to be protected and taken care of, she often reverts to her inner child, using the Princess Diana technique of lowering her eyes or gazing away with a sigh, that says look at how sweet and vulnerable I am. She reverts to her inner 6 year old, the one who ran to a mummy who assured her it was everybody else's fault, but hers. When she finishes her tales of woe, she looks to the listener for hugs and reassurance - when people are horrid to her, she expects a reward.
For people like myself who study human behaviour, Gerry and Kate are the gift that keeps on giving. I really hate to say I knew it, but it was obvious from the very beginning that Gerry and Kate were lapping up the fame that came with the loss of their daughter. Almost immediately they usurped Madeleine as the victim in this case, and became the victims themselves. It was clever and it was manipulative and more than anything else, it was downright evil.
Its a common ploy used by attractive women the world over
Oops, please disregard last line, it was the beginning of a thought I didn't complete earlier on and I forgot to delete it (blushing smiley)
DeleteLots of emotion/frustration in the above comments- rightly so.
ReplyDeleteBut let's face it - unless the ruling classes allow it - nada is going to change in this case.
Not a sausage.
John Stalker hit it right first time - local knowledge was required to spirit Madeleine
away - that comment totally purged from the web now.
Gerry's comment: 'no comment' - as to whether her knew Robert Murat - same RM at the time an estate agent with a jangling bunch of keys to empty properties around Luz.
Jenny's macabre information stall by the seafront:
'Come and speak to me if you don't want to fess up to the cops'
Is it that obvious? - yes it is.
I fear we are over-complicating matters -
a conspiracy (an agreement between two or more persons to commit a crime at some time in the future)
is at the core of the entire shebang
an alive or departed Madeleine could not have been removed from Luz, without local help.
OK, lets hypothesise, Madeleine dies or is murdered, what are the chances that a local man, living within metres of the holiday complex, a man with no criminal record, a virtual stranger, AND his mother, will assist with the disposal of the body and keep quiet about it, despite being named as an arguido himself?
ReplyDeleteIf local help was available, the body would not have been in Apartment 5A long enough for the odour of cadaver to accumulate, nor would it have been found in the most obvious car, the one hired by the McCanns.
What possible reason could Robert Murat have to jeopardise his life, his freedom and his reputation to assist this group of doctors in one of the most heinous crimes imaginable?
I believe Gerry was showing off when he said he wasn't going to comment on Robert Murat. Gerry had probably fantasised about saying 'no comment' to a crowd of paparazzi for years and no doubt gone through a few imaginary interviews with Paxman where he came out top. It is all part of Gerry's make up, he imagines situations, then he makes them real.
The greatest gift this case could get would be a 'patsy' to take the blame. Robert Murat, on paper, was perfect. Unfortunately for the McCanns, their team, the Government, CEOP, and every other agency, be they police or gold standard private detectives hired by the parents, have been unable to make anything stick.
To quote Gerry 'there is noooooo evidence' that Robert Murat is involved, and if there had been, the poor man would be swinging from a lamp post courtesy of an angry mob, or rotting in prison by now. The villa he shared with his mother was searched from top to bottom, including the garden and with the specialist dogs from Scotland Yard, nothing was found. The British police last year, with their heavy excavating equipment went nowhere near Casa Liliana, because it is a red herring used first by Team McCann, and it is now being used by Stephen Birch who wants donations and Tony Bennett who is determined to prove this is a sex crime. Bennett like Gamble, is convinced that we are surrounded by perverts and sexual deviants, and is just as determined to root them out. Whatever is going on in the nations bedrooms, these two want it banned.
I don't think there was anything macabre in Jenny Murat's stall. Jenny, like her son, wanted to help. That a Sun journalist saw the similarities to the Soham case, was a scoop for the Sun, but Robert Murat was no Ian Huntley, he had no record of sex crimes or even a murky past, he was simply a regular guy who was able to help because he spoke Portuguese.
In the four months that the McCanns, their family, friends, bridesmaids, religious and legal advisors holidayed in PDL, I am sure they got to know the area very well, especially with all that jogging.
Hi, thanks for your considered response.
ReplyDeleteAs there are no new facts in the case we might as well speculate - hell, we could just unearth more than the odd sock, NSY came up with - and at a fraction of 7 million squid.
Casa Liliana - Madeleine was never near that particular place - (hence my comment about access to lots of empty properties in/around Luz).
Was a heinous crime commited? - A fundamental question methinks.
A young girl disappeared - that is the only thing we can be certain of.
By removing 'stranger' from 'stranger abduction' we open a MUCH broader canvas re. what happened in Luz.
-Olegário de Sousa: 'revenge was not a motive' - paraphrased
-The glibness of the parents throughout their stay in Portugal and beyond.
-WoC
-The fund and the constant reminder to ring the doctor's number. (hey, call us, not the pesky plod - we can sort something out)
My points, if I may -
Madeleine either woke and wandered - and ended up in one of the many deep roadwork ditches in Luz at the time.
Madeleine woke and wandered and was picked up - say, in the Baptista supermarket car park - where the Portuguese dogs stopped alerting to her scent.
Madeleine was spirited away by a party known to the doctors - and possibly known to Madeleine herself.
Any 'removal' of Madeleine from the OC - which left no trace of her afterwards - would in all likelihood have required local knowledge/a facilitator with local knowledge.
All the above batshit crazy possibly - but a bit more sane than the volcano/fox dragged her away/cloning theories that have made the rounds.
Whatever,
in the words of the Grateful Dead: 'What a Long Strange Trip It's Been'
The blood and the cadaver dog alerts confirm that Madeleine did not leave apartment 5A alive. Whilst I acknowledge all the dangers faced by those small children left in those holiday apartments, including wandering off, everything indicates death in the apartment.
ReplyDeleteA small child has disappeared, whether she was murdered or died as a result of an accident, a heinous crime has been committed, even if that crime is ONLY the concealment of a body. And if they concealed a body, several major heinous crimes have been committed since, not least perverting the course of justice and personal financial gain from a child's death.
That's the article of faith - surely
ReplyDelete'The Grime dogs'
Alert - they did - no doubt
To what, scientifically, FSS were unable or unwilling to tell us.
If the alerts alone, form the basis of one's belief
Discussion of alternative scenarios becomes redundant.
Da scheiden sich die Geister.
So, Anon 13.08; I thought it was established beyond doubt the dogs alerted to both blood and cadaver scent. What the FSS couldn't determine, was whether it belonged to Madeleine...right?
ReplyDeleteBearing in mind what other items (clothes, car etc) had the same smell, what's the chance these alerts are related to someone else than Madeleine McCann? And she's the one missing.
I don't think that the use of sniffer dogs in criminal crimes works this way. When people talk about the previous 'successes' of these dogs; their 'success' was based on the fact that their alerts lead to evidence, which was a body, bones or something tangible. The dogs are trained on a reward system, with smells that simulate a dead body; therefore the chances for error are higher than one might think. This is why they are used as intelligence, and not as evidence. Otherwise, every country could simply use dogs for the truth or otherwise of violent crimes that lead to murder.
Deletebeyond reasonable doubt = evidence
ReplyDeletethere ain't none = no trial nor conviction(s)
these are the facts - and two police forces have gone on record with this
So, no evidence to support either scenario then? I'd say there's a lot more that indicates parental involvement than the "official version". Forget the 3d of May, whatever happened happened earlier in the week. Read dr. Martin mccannfiles "X factor" to get the whole picture.
ReplyDeleteWhat's the official version?
ReplyDelete- the PJ files - redacted by 3000 pages?
Don't know a Dr. Martin - what kind of doctor is he then - what's his alma mater?
The official version is that Madeleine was abducted by a stranger. The inconvenient stuff in the PJ files is ignored by OG, as You probably know.
ReplyDeleteAbout dr Martin Roberts alma mater, you'd better ask him. Not that a title matters. Dr or no dr, his writings are always excellent
I followed your advice and read 'X- factor' - that piece was cogent and flowed nicely.
ReplyDeleteDid it tell us what happened to Madeleine on that holiday?
Nope.
Excuse my cynicism but anyone who calls themselves 'Dr.' or the 'Author' or 'Sentimental Agent' - imbuing their posts with authority by attaching a title.
Is to be mistrusted. However well the phrases trickle off their typing fingers.
The Tapasniks' bond breaks - and a least one of them blabs - that's the only way
the case will break - save for an alive or departed Madeleine found.
Ah well, don't think MR Roberts needs to put any weight to his posts by using a fake title. My guess is that he genuinely IS a doctor. Let us now leave the (totally unimportant) title issue.
ReplyDeleteI think the piece does tell us that May 3d is part of the aftermath. Which is not the same as telling us WHAT exactly happened. What more can we do than trying to figure out this mystery by ourselves, with the help of facts here and there. How clever of MR Roberts to provide these insights, nothing of what he writes is fabricated.
But yes, there surely needs to be a bond broken to get the whole truth out in the open.
The original question was the chance of dog alerts being connected to someone else than Madeleine...
Martin Grime in his own words:
ReplyDeletesource: 09 Processos 9 pages 2473 - 2483 August 2007
'It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to
'a cadaver scent' contaminant.
No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.'
More from Martin Grime - in his own words:
ReplyDeleteSource as above:
'In my role as advisor to the U.S. Justice Department I have facilitated
assessment of numerous cadaver search dog teams in the United States.
These dogs are exclusively trained using human cadaver sources. When I
introduced decomposing pig cadavers into training assessments 100 % of the
animals alerted to the medium. (The products were obtained from whole piglet
cadaver not processed food for human consumption). The result from
scientific experiments and research to date is suggestive that the scent of
human and pig decomposing material is so similar that we are unable to 'train'
the dog to distinguish between the two. That is not to say that this may not be
possible in the future'.
Must have been that pig that kate brought to work and on holiday that they alerted to then
DeleteThe blood alerts match the cadaver alerts, that's good enough for me. Only McCann things marked. Either the dogs are totally unreliable, or we trust them. Presumably they wouldn't be used if they were that unreliable. As for the corroborating evidence, to bad circumstantial factors don't count in this case.
ReplyDeleteBehaviour alone gives them away. Scott Peterson received a guilty verdict for less.
So you argue with Martin Grime now?
DeleteSo now you're saying the Ocean Club is an animal (pig) farm?
ReplyDeleteSo you argue with Martin Grime now?
Delete'Only McCann things marked'.
ReplyDeleteOR that only McCann things had the contaminant on them - as expressed as a possibility by Mr. Grime himself.
His own, unadulterated words.
(pls see above)
'Behaviour alone gives them away' - is not a scientific viewpoint, I'm afraid.
I don't care much for the doctors - their child care record is abysmal - but sending them to the gallows because of 'behaviour' - is simply not enough to go on.
What next?
Body language? Graphology? Star signs?
But what abort the blood 'positives' ? Or was that a contaminant as well? Maybe your answer will be "ask the dogs"
ReplyDelete'ask the dogs'?
DeleteNo, that would be childish - but read the PJ files (what we are allowed to see of them) - and educate yourself.
To save you the bother: on page 2464:
ReplyDeleteMr. Grime states:
' She (the crime scene dog) will find blood that's historically very old and she will find anybody's blood, any human blood, which is important to make sure that everybody knows.'
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Has anybody read the PJ files?
Yep, so some pigs died in 5 A, somehow coming in contact with ancient human blood, possibly Mr Jones.....? Right.
ReplyDeleteAsk Mr. Grime - these are his words
DeleteNot quite. He is mainly saying that You can't exclude anything, as long as no corroborating evidence exists.
DeleteJust as you can't exclude the possibility that Cristiano Ronaldo snatched Madeleine McCann from her bed that horrible evening in 2007.
The probability however.....? Needles in haystacks etc....
Busting another myth, the myth that says EVRD alerts were always matched by CSI alerts
ReplyDeletePage 2483 - Martin Grime's own words:
'CANINE SEARCH OF MR McCANN'S VILLA, PRESENT OCCUPANCY.
The villa interior, garden, and all property within were searched by the EVRD.
The only alert indication given was when the dog located a pink cuddly toy in
the villas lounge. The CSI dog did not alert to the toy when screened
separately.
It is my view that it is possible that the EVRD is alerting to cadaver scent
contamination. No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence.'
Ok, so what is source of the cadaver scent contamination? It had to come from somewhere? Absolutely none of your 'unreliable' dogs arguments stand up, good luck with them in Court, because even a non expert will annihilate them. Kate washed Cuddle Cat, for heavens sake, that alone, convinced many doubters - no grieving mother would ever wash away their child's scent.
DeleteKate even did the washing on the Saturday, less than two days after her daughter was 'taken'. Strange, because she has stated many times that in the first 48 hours she and Gerry were virtually non functioning, but she was functioning enough to get the laundry on.
"Kate even did the washing on the Saturday"
DeleteReally - of course you will be able to provide some proof of that.
I take it you are not familiar with 'Poacher's' views on the dogs subject?
Deletehighly illuminating stuff
Cadaverine can be purchased commercially of course: one source: Fisher Scientific
It can also be home made - details of which I omit, in case anyone is having their lunch.
Devil's in the details
Not quite. He is mainly saying that nothing can be excluded. As in stating that it can't be 100% excluded that Cristiano Ronaldo snatched Madeleine McCann from her bed in PdL that evening in 2007.
ReplyDeleteThe probability however.......:-))
"Nearly 8 years on this case still remains unsolved."
ReplyDeleteNo shit Sherlock!
" Should parents of a missing child be allowed to conduct their own investigation, in Portugal or indeed, here in the UK. Well yes, of course they should, I don't believe in banning anything. "
ReplyDeleteSo your point is?
Maybe spending other people's money on futile endeavours is good for the soul? How's the Hull pioneer these days, has she hit the big time yet?
DeleteThe point is 22:04, when a crime is committed abroad, should the British government support a private investigation in opposition to the home police force, because the accused are British? An investigation that hampered the work of their police and ultimately led to no-one being charged?
DeleteThe Madeleine Fund, filled to overflowing by slick, professional and highly publicised appeals for cash has never been used to SEARCH for Madeleine. The 'Fund' (not a charity) is reserved for one child and one family. As that child hasn't been seen in 8 years, its reserved for one family, or more particularly to enable Kate and Gerry to stay out of jail. It has been used to pay for spin doctors to clean up their reputations, teams of high powered lawyers to crush their critics and a string of dodgy private detectives who specialise in fraud and money laundering, some of whom are now in prison.
In what way did the British government support a private investigation?
DeleteMissed that bit.
DeleteWho was accused?
We had two arguidoes and one arguida, Gerry, Robert and Kate.
'Persons of interest' neither witnesses nor accused.
Devil is in the details.
According to Kate in her book, page 134 an arguido is a formal status given to Robert Murat which meant he would be officially be treated as a suspect in the crime.
DeleteAs Kate and Gerry were also arguidoes they too would be officially treated as suspects in the crime.
This is in Kate Mccanns own words, arguidoes were suspects in the crime. As you say, the devil is in the detail of which you seem to have no idea.
Charming - and utterly wrong
DeleteLevenson enq.: Gerry McCann:
21 about it, and you'll correct me if I'm wrong because you
22 know more about this than me, arguido does not mean
23 "suspect", it means "person of interest"; is that
24 correct?
25 A. That's what we were advised was the closest correlationor translation within UK law at the time, and I think it
They can howl at the moon as much as they like, it is their prerogative. Yet after all these years there remains no image of Madeleine in the public arena which contains a lacrimal caruncle. Also, the PJ have still not received a valid birth certificate or a shred of substantiated DNA evidence thus far. Quelle surprise.
ReplyDeleteThe dogs are a win win, they freeze the crime in time and space. Look who's logo is emblazoned on the Eddie and Keela videos, who filmed it, who paid for the videos and why are they still on YouTube eight years later?
Maybe the former orchard at number five can tell us, Grand Designs it is not. No offence to the original builder and his excellent original plans and building work.
What is it about number five and the reason no investigation ever goes there, that in itself, based on the evidence, is not normal.
The birth certificate is easily googleable.
DeleteWhere is the suppressed colour in Madeleine's eyes?
ReplyDeleteBrunt and McGurrin, behave like white trash.
ReplyDeleteYours sincerely, Julie Harrison, Wigan.