As we know from the infamous Sun video, these highly trained EVRD dogs alerted to the scent of blood and cadaver in the McCann's apartment, to their belongings and to car they hired 3 weeks after Madeleine disappeared. No-where else. The boot of the hire car was seen left open overnight and the foul smell explained away with stories of rotting meat, babies nappies and trips to the local dump.
The McCanns did not react to the video of the dogs alerting in the way we would expect parents of a missing child to react. For most of us, our first thoughts would be terror that our child may have come to harm. Both Kate and Gerry immediately went on to the defence, in a 'you can't prove nuffink' stance that seemed to bring an end to communications between the PJ and themselves.
Since then, they have been searching for ways and means in which to discredit the dogs and vicariously, their handler. Had it not been for the fact that Martin Grime is far too highly respected among experts worldwide, I am sure they would have gone all out to destroy his career too.
It seems even with a publicity campaign as well funded and resourced as the search for Madeleine, they have not yet been able to come up with a credible reason as to why those specialist dogs only alerted to the parents' possessions?
I have attempted to read and understand some of the longwinded, anonymous diatribes explaining how these highly trained, in demand, £90k per job, dogs can't tell the difference between a crime scene and a café serving pork chops, but they haven't impressed me much.
And in response to a post this morning, I have no problem with contributors putting forward arguments and explanations as to why we should discard the alerts of the dogs. They were enough to 'end' the search for Madeleine and to make the parents arguidos. They were a turning point in the investigation of this case, and might well be a turning point in any future trial.
I am not interested in reams of rubbish about the tragic Jersey case and coconuts, nor playground insults, but I like to keep an open mind, if there is a credible reason for the dogs alerting, I'd love to hear it!
The only other option would be that the Portuguese police were trying to frame the parents. 'I was set up m'lud'. This however would involve a plan more elaborate than that drawn up for the allied invasion of the Normandy beaches. It would involve the distinct smells being obtained (from where?) and strategically planted Mission Impossible style in numerous places and on numerous objects associated with the McCanns without their knowledge.
And for what reason? Why would the Portuguese police want to blame the parents and leave a dangerous child predator on the loose in the Algarve? What of their own children's safety? Those police were looking for a small, vulnerable child, I simply do not believe that any one of them would have abandoned their duty or responsibility towards her for a long lunch or an afternoon off. Who could even think that way?
The McCanns do actually believe the whole world is out to get them. And worryingly, they were able to draw the entire British establishment into their strange paranoid delusion. The UK's dim witted sofa queens and racist journalists gleefully supported the two arguidos against the entire Portuguese Judiciary. They chose to believe the word of two parents who left their very young children alone for the evening to go out to dinner with their friends, over the word of a foreign police force!
 |
| As the dogs Sandra |
'If there is a credible reason for the dogs alerting, I'd love to hear it!'
ReplyDeleteA reasonable request, so how about Nancy Darling Ph.D, in Psychology Today -
March 28, 2011: (excerpt)
'Is the science behind sniffer dogs bogus?
Do sniffer dogs keep us safe or respond to handler prejudice?
Four researchers at UCDavis replicated the Clever Hans effect in a study of how sniffer dogs are influenced by handler's beliefs. In particular, the authors took 18 dog-handler pairs and took them through a series of exercises in which the dogs searched for what were purportedly explosives and drugs. As is typical in both dog training sessions and in real life, the dogs were confronted by many distractions and falso leads: empty boxes and packages of yummy sausages.
What was interesting about this study was that there were, in fact, no drugs or explosives to be found. But the handlers thought there were. In fact, there were boxes labeled as containing contraband or being decoys. The handlers could read the labels. Presumably the dogs could not.
--------
In other words, handlers and dogs work as a team. Either the dog or the handler can trigger an alert.
That's important for interpreting dog behavior, because it means that the dog is not acting independently and can't be seen as an 'objective' and 'unprejudiced' reporter.
This is also important for training. It means that for handlers to take best advantage of their dogs' abilities, they need to train themselves to not react on their own suspicions. How to do that is actually an empirical challenge, because it is doubtful that the trainers were trying to influence their dogs - any more than was the owner of Clever Hans or any researcher working with research participants.
Just because the dogs can be influenced, doesn't mean they can't do their jobs
------------
Physics has gravity. Psychology has reinforcement. Both laws tend to work very reliably.'
Grime:
ReplyDelete"No evidential or intelligence reliability can be made from this
alert unless it can be confirmed with corroborating evidence. "
Cristobell isn't the content of this blog just the cornerstone of this case the dogs are the only thing that scare these people and its laughable that anyone could try and discredit 9 different alerts to the mccannss and only the mccann as being guided by the Handler. Keep up the good work your blog gets more popular for us and more scarey for them every day
ReplyDeleteDogs cannot confirm anything without corroborating evidence.
DeleteIs that so hard to understand?
See the Guernsey case.
Many thanks 22:09, much appreciated.
Delete22:31 You repeat that same phrase over and over again as if you were addressing a Judge and Jury in a Court of Law. Whether or not it can confirm anything at the appropriate time remains to be seen. There have been successful prosecutions in cases where dogs have alerted but no body has been found.
If the defence rests on proving the dogs wrong, then I think they are on very dodgy ground. Do they have an expert willing and able to discredit the work of the EVRD dogs? I can't see them queuing up to be honest.
The dogs were of course an indicator. And so strong were their indications that they changed the entire course of the original investigation. If their alerts were to be discarded, why call them out there in the first place?
The dogs did exactly what they are trained for, we saw them in action and it was quite obvious what they were alerting to. The dogs confirmed that someone died in Apartment 5A. Madeleine has not been seen in 8 years. Sometimes you have to join the dots.
22.31 Have you got your jumpers mixed up?
DeleteI think SY gave their view on the reliability of the dogs by bringing them back to pdl during their investigation and allowing them to be publically seen
DeleteStanford Law Review May 9, 2012
ReplyDeleteJane Bambauer - visiting assistant professor Brooklyn Law School:
'The perfectly accurate police dog is an easy case, but also a purely academic one. Dogs are very inaccurate, and though new technologies will significantly reduce error, no screen will ever be error-free.'
That statement just hangs in the air 22:36. It is not leading anywhere and we don't where it came from. Ergo, it makes very little sense. That often happens when you take things out of context.
DeleteAgain, I note the reference to US law. Strictly speaking you should be researching Portuguese Law Reports (including the ancient ones), even English ones might resonate with the readers, I'm just not sure where US law comes into all this.
Grime is allegedly happy to work for the FBI in the US of A
DeleteSo I think it's highly relevant.
Whether the EVDR dog barks: Obrigado or Thank You - should hardly make any difference.
'Director of Search Team is Charged with Faking Evidence'
ReplyDeleteKnight Ridder Newspapers
by David Ashenfelter
Posted on Mon, Jun. 23, 2003
(KRT) - A Midland, Mich., woman who has received international acclaim using a cadaver-sniffing dog to crack homicide cases was charged in federal court Monday with planting evidence at crime scenes.
The government said Anderson and her dog, Eagle, searched Michigan's Huron National Forest in June 2001 and April 2002 for a 20-year-old Oscoda woman who vanished in 1980.
The government accused Anderson of planting and pretending to discover human bones and carpet fiber at the site.
Oscoda Township Police Chief Robert LaVack said investigators, several of whom were suspicious of Anderson after she and her dog found some two dozen human bones in the national forest. Tests showed the bones came from other humans, not the missing woman.
"This one hurt," he said.
The government said Anderson lied to the FBI and Justice Department about planting human bones in Oscoda and at the Proud Lake Recreational Center in Oakland County in January 2002 and at a business in Bay City in October 2000.'
As already mentioned on the old blog wasn't the results from the Birmingham forensic lab correct! but later changed in the McCann's favour? I believe the laboratory has now closed down. I know I read about it but can't remember where.
ReplyDeleteCould you Cristobell, or anyone else reading this blog tell me if this is true? I'd be most grateful, maybe someone else read it differently and I've made a mistake.
Thank you.
Happy to respond 23:01, and can do no better than give you this link: Martin Brunt and the 100%match:
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3HQ74Rfdbk
Thanks for the link Cristobell much appreciated. Nice to know I still retain a few of my marbles. I don't remember seeing an update regarding that report by Martin Brunt. If he got it wrong I'm surprised the McCann's didn't sue HIM. Then we have Philomena's input about expecting Kate to be charged with 'Madeleine's accidental death', all these and numerous other slip-ups made by her and others, and they expect the public to believe they're innocent!
Deleteand this is how it all ended:
ReplyDeleteDepartment of Justice, September 28, 2004:
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Justice Department today announced the sentencing of Sandra Marie Anderson for falsifying material facts, making false statements to federal authorities, and obstruction of justice. Anderson, a handler of canines trained to find human remains-who had worked with federal and state authorities on numerous investigations-was sentenced to 21 months in prison and ordered to pay over $14,500 in restitution.
Anderson had participated in high-profile investigations and rescue efforts, achieving a measure of international fame for her dog-handling skills. Between June 2001 and April 2002, she participated in several searches with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and local law enforcement as part of an investigation into the disappearance of a woman who was suspected to have been murdered and buried in Michigan’s Huron National Forest.
In April of 2002, a crime-scene technician witnessed Anderson fraudulently planting a bone in the forest. A wide-ranging federal investigation into Anderson’s wrongdoing revealed a pattern of fraudulent behavior. In multiple investigations, she repeatedly planted human remains, fibers, and items stained with her own blood, which she later represented as evidence. Anderson made false statements to authorities in an attempt to cover up her wrongdoing. She pleaded guilty on March 10, 2004.'
Funny in all SY 4 year £10+ m review/investigation there has never been a hint that Martin grimes was being investigated. Because Harold shipman was a serial killer should we refuse to allow doctors to care for our elderly
DeleteGood point 08:13, was Harold Shipman representative of doctors?
DeleteAs an aside, my mother used to call her doctor 'Shipman', even to his face, lol, especially after she lost her marbles completely. I could see the pained look on his face, and he had my sympathy but it did make me giggle.
Well done on the research in discovering a 13 year old case of fraud involving an EVRD dog. Unfortunately, such is life every skilled profession will attract fraudsters and chancers, people not quite as qualified or as good at their jobs as they pretend to be. They slip through occasionally, even in the police service, legal and medical professions.
ReplyDeleteBut just as one pretendy detective is not representative of all detectives, one rogue dog handler does not mean that all dog handlers are up to no good. Specialist EVRD dogs are still used worldwide and the unique skills of the top dogs and their handlers remain very much in demand.
But, as I say, kudos on the research, but I don't really see how you can connect the above case to the Madeleine case. Martin Grime and his dogs have a proven track record.
Cadaver Dog’s Alert as Reasonable Suspicion, not Probable Cause
ReplyDeleteBy Terry Fleck (polivek9.com)
'Cadaver Dogs:
The question that remains is the cadaver or human remains dog. Is this dog a human scent dog or a contraband substance dog?
There is no Federal or State case law, that I’m aware of, that addresses an alert from a cadaver or human remains dog as probable cause to obtain a search warrant, search or arrest.
Therefore, if the cadaver or human remains dog is placed in the contraband substance dog group, that alert would stand alone. If the cadaver or human remains dog is placed in the human scent dog group, that alert would have to be corroborated by other evidence.
Based upon review of the case law below, an alert from a cadaver dog is only reasonable suspicion. The dog alert must be corroborated by other evidence.
based on •
State v. Smith (2002 Ohio 4402 Court of Appeals of Ohio, Ninth Appellate District, Wayne County 2002) and
Clark v. State (140 Md. App. 540 Court of Special Appeals of Maryland 2001)'.
23:26. Yeh, I tried a few times, but I couldn't make nor tail of that, lol. (no pun intended).
DeleteNot even just lawyerspeak it is US lawyerspeak. Again, kudos for all that research, you have obviously left no law book unturned. You'll go far. However, how does it apply in, say, Portugal?
You asked in your OP: ''If there is a credible reason for the dogs alerting, I'd love to hear it!'
DeleteI am giving you some material to consider or dismiss - as you please.
A dog's alert does not in itself constitute proof - at best, it indicates something that needs to be explored further by the authortities - and crucially corroborated by scientific testing - Grime said so himself.
Anyway, here's my last contribution as I don't want to monopolise your bandwidth and bore everyone to death
Would be nice if a genuine, fact centred conversation could spring from this though.
FORENSIC EVIDENCE CANINES: STATUS, TRAINING, and UTILIZATION
Michael M. Zanoni, Ph.D., Adela Morris, Mary Messer, B.A., Rita Martinez
Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences
February 1998 - San Francisco CA
excerpt:
'In such a situation the trier of fact may easily be misled as to both the accuracy and precision of the dog's actions: Accuracy in the sense that the dog (depending upon its level of training) may be reacting to something other than residual scent from decomposed human tissue; precision in that the dog may be reacting correctly to the scent of decomposed human tissue, but imprecise in the sense that the dog is not differentiating between whose decomposed human tissue is giving the scent. Further, there may be legitimate reasons for the scent being there: someone may have been injured and left bloody clothing there, someone may have left a used sanitary napkin, etc. Our research demonstrates that residual scent from decomposed human tissue persists in a closed building for many months at levels sufficient to cause a trained dog to alert.
'1) There is a significant potential for a dog handler to offer unintentionally misleading or improper testimony about the presence or absence of residual scent from decomposed human tissue.
----
5) A severely fatigued dog can inadvertently be pressured to give a false alert because it wants to terminate the search in order to rest. Therefore, it is important to maintain the dog at a high level of physical fitness so that it may work for multiple hours with only brief rest periods.
---------
6) Dogs used to develop probable cause based upon residual scent must be negatively conditioned to human urine, feces, and semen in order to ensure that the animal will not alert when encountering these substances during a search. All dogs, no matter what level of training, used in the detection of decomposed human tissue should be negatively conditioned to the scent of decomposed non-human tissue. It must be kept in mind, however, that many dogs will react or show interest to any decomposed tissue at certain short times during the decomposition process.'
Btw 00:19, polite debate is always welcome. I actually enjoy having my ideas and theories challenged, I live by the same philosophy as Manuel from Fawlty Towers - 'I know nothing'.
DeleteWhen I began researching this case I wanted to believe the parents and that was the way I initially examined all of the available evidence. There does however, come a point where it 'if it walks like a duck and quacks like duck' you have to accept it is a duck.
I fully understood how cruel it would have been to add to the parents' pain if they were innocent. I would not comment negatively until I was 100% certain, 99% wasn't good enough. It is for this reason that I am accused of being a 'former pro' or even a 'pro' in disguise, lol. For myself it was a matter of good conscience (those old Catholic ways remain, doh!) and my conscience is clear, I never said anything that I would later come to regret or that would hurt innocent people.
As I have said many times before, my interest in this case is my study of human behaviour, and this case has been and still is, fascinating on every level. I have nothing personal against the parents, it is their actions I dislike because they hurt other people. If they weren't hurting anyone else, I could maybe keep schtum, but its the wishing and going out of their way to inflict misery and fear on others that sticks in my craw.
As for the troll accusations. Bring 'em on. My work and indeed my life is an open book. They have had years to plough through all my bumf (poor sods) and they haven't found a sensational 'hater' headline yet. In latter years, I know that everything I write is scrutinised by legal eagles and grammar police with red pens and a multi headed troll with a blue one, lol. It matters not to the narcissistic moi, it means I always have at least one reader, even if he/she has to be physically manacled to my blog! As long as someone is reading, I will keep writing! SAS (Smart Arsed Son), thinks me standing on a plinth reading chapters from my book would make a good exhibit for the Chamber of Horrors!
But I digress. You are as entitled to voice your opinions and arguments as anyone else 00:19, it may well be that this case will balance on the alerts/evidence of the dogs. It would be wrong on every level to deny a suspect the right to challenge any evidence the prosecution may have against them. I actually think it is a shame that the pro forums degenerated into a bitch fest almost from the get go, because they don't have any credible commentators to speak on the parents' behalf. And lets face it, the paid ones keep taking them deeper and deeper into the mire.
'' someone may have been injured and left bloody clothing there, someone may have left a used sanitary napkin etc,''
DeletePull the other one, that's as bad as the shopping bags that leaked and left the stench in the McCann's rented car! How about the evidence there are you saying the dogs were wrong again?
I read your post with interest 00:19.
ReplyDeleteWhilst I am sure there are experts out there who can demolish every point made, I can only respond as a layperson. The idea that these highly trained dogs cannot distinguish between bodily fluids and an actual body is somewhat bizarre.
In July 2007, when the Mark Harrison searches began, the dogs searched several apartments and several cars without alerting. In a popular holiday resort, bodily fluids would be in abundance. From blood on the floor from previous occupants who cut themselves shaving to semen on the ceiling from the last swinging party.
If your argument is that the dogs were alerting to sundry residual body fluids, then your argument is lost because they didn't alert anywhere else.
The problem is that if you are relying on the behaviour of the Cadaver dogs to prove your theory that Madeline was not abducted, then you must take into consideration that those same dogs have been proved to be wrong (as at Haut De La Garenne). In normal circumstances, you would not rely upon unreliable evidence to prove a theory.
DeleteSo are dog alerts unreliable?
ReplyDeleteThere is no doubt that these dogs do sterling work and their efforts are frequently rewarded by the discovery of missing persons or their remains. However, there is good reason why sniffer dog alerts are not admissible as evidence on their own and that is the evidential proof of their unreliability.
The fact is, these dogs are used as a tool to find bodies. All the experts quoted above are at pains to emphasise this. The final proof of the dog's success is the discovery of forensic evidence. Although there was much media speculation and many FALSE stories about the forensic evidence in the Madeleine McCann case, the final and OFFISIAL conclusion was that there was NOTHING to suggest that Madeleine McCann had died in Praia da Luz or that her parents had harmed her. The fact that stories to the contrary were in circulation at all was a crime in itself.
14:39 I would have to argue with your point that there NOTHING to suggest Madeleine had died in PDL, or more specifically, Apartment 5A. Whilst there was no body, there was also no child. It would be highly incompetent and completely unprofessional for police of any nationality to cast aside the findings of the dogs. Especially in a missing person case. If the police have intelligence to show that searching for a live child would be fruitless, then it is wrong to waste police resources and the goodwill of the public, by asking them to look for a child who cannot be found.
ReplyDeleteAs for the stories that were in circulation being a crime, what did the McCanns expect? First rule of showbiz, if you put yourself in the public eye you will be criticized and you will never be able to control that criticism. And if you think you can, you best go join King Canute on that beach.
Kate and Gerry were big in those days (it was the movies that got small), and no doubt top dollar was paid for the more juicy ones. You can't blame the media moguls, the McCanns created the audience, and the cry of the audience for more, more, more was music to the ailing tabloids' ears. Any story Madeleine or Kate and Gerry related was shifting copy. In fact, I am surprised Clarence didn't get a mention in the Queen's honours for his contribution to wealth creation and industry.
Those so critical of Rupert Murdoch and his news agencies, should try to remember that news agencies REPORT the news they do not create it. They are the transmitters through which we receive the news, they do not have the time, money, or inclination to create lavish film sets or war settings for every news report.
I feel that if some of the antis could make a stab at understanding the way in which the news industry, or indeed the world around them, works, they would be able to take their tin foil hats off now and then. The theories around RM and Sky news in the cesspit are actually laugh out loud funny.
DNA tests on samples taken from the car proved inconclusive, but the Portuguese police WRONGLY told journalists they were a “100 per cent match” for Madeleine.
DeleteI'm sure if that was the case the McCann's would have made a complaint, and had that corrected. (18:17)
DeleteI'm sure if that was the case the McCann's would have made a complaint, and had that corrected. (18:17)
DeleteTHAT was the case and was corrected.
08:46, You're wrong. The video is still on-line for all to see WHY leave it there if it's misinforming the public?
DeleteThere is a lot still on line 10.08 Doesn't mean to say it's all true.The fact is that the samples were inconclusive end of.
DeleteRubbish as usual 11:04 get your brain in gear!! Do you seriously believe the McCann's defenders would allow that video to be left on the internet if it wasn't true? As for the results being inconclusive we all know why they were... well those of us that have a brain cell do. 100% correct. END OFF.
DeleteNot rubbish at all 14;00 There are countless Forums and blogs out there.with untruths and doctored videos.
DeleteEven the McCann's and the powers that be are unable to find everything.And depend a lot on being pointed in the right direction to weed the evil and the liars out.(Coughs)Why don't you give your arse a rest and give your mouth a chance.EH ,
Are you completely thick? prick your ears up you numbskull. When Kate was confronted with the fact that the dogs had alerted to cadaver on her clothes she made the excuse that she'd been wearing them for work, supposedly attending six dead bodies which turned out to be untrue!! Use your common sense if you have any to work out why she would need to lie about that.
DeleteWith reference to your last comment it's about time you took your own advice because you're the one talking a load of shit. I suggest you read the facts, and do some proper research before commenting further.
Not thick at all 00.1 My point was that there are doctored video's on the web.
DeleteI also don't give a jot as to who alerted who and what for what reason and whether you like it or not.They are NOT suspects..
Eddie the sniffer dog - the animal that had supposedly found the 'scent of death' in the Portuguese flat where Madeleine McCann disappeared - no longer had a licence for UK police forensic work when Harper started using him in Jersey. Eddie, whose owner, Martin Grime, was paid £93,600 for less than five months' work, triggered the first excavations by barking at a spot where Harper's team then unearthed what was claimed to be part of a child's skull. In fact, as a Kew Gardens expert has now confirmed, it was a piece of COCONUT SHELL..
DeleteRead more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1217863/Bungled-Jersey-child-abuse-probe-branded-20million-shambles.html#ixzz3qz3LyuXB
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
30. When they heard about the dogs’ findings, the McCanns reacted strangely, claiming that…
DeleteThe ‘smell of death’ may have been found on Kate’s clothes because she was said to have been close to six corpses in her last two weeks at work, on the pink soft toy ‘Cuddle Cat’ because she ‘sometimes took Cuddle Cat to work’, or that the ‘smell of death’ could have come from rotting meat that Gerry McCann was taking to the local rubbish dump from time to time.
If Madeleine’s DNA, were to be found in the boot of their car, it may have come from the children’s dirty nappies they claimed they were carrying in the boot.
Any blood found in the flat might have come from Madeleine ‘grazing her leg’ or suffering a nosebleed. In fact, with the help of Martin Grime’s bloodhound, the police found blood underneath the tiles below a window in the living room of the McCanns’ apartment.
Verdict - False and misleading. According to their statements the McCanns couldn't explain why the dog(s) barked. The forensics didn't identify any of the samples as blood. They did identify someone's DNA in the samples from (underneath) the tiles: the DNA of a Portuguese forensics officer who collected the samples
Got to disagree with you - this was a huge story, the media were not going to let it go so the McCanns were bound to be in the spotlight. It was the story, not the McCanns, which created the audience. It also suited the investigation because the publicity may have stirred people's memories.
ReplyDeleteGerry expressed a wish for the media story to die down early on, they needed time to concentrate on themselves and the little ones, only problem was the GDP cash registers weren't listening.
DeleteI agree 16:27 the story had all the key ingredients, an angelic child, attractive middle class parents and a bogeyman. It had a plot that could have saved Dynasty and kept it running for years. More importantly it had 'cometh the hour, cometh the man'. Gerry found a need and use for his unique talents. He found a way in which to make his huge dreams become a reality. He wanted to be a mover and a shaker, he wanted to walk on the world stage, not just the Whitehouse lawn.
DeleteHowever, you detract from the genius of the McCann campaign 16:27. The plans drawn up in the PDL war rooms and Warners' tennis courts were phenomenally successful. Within weeks the Madeleine Fund was stacking up millions, the world responded as if there had been a major disaster, I believe some banks even had facilities for people to donate cash directly. The McCanns have probably received more cash to search for one missing child, than a large village wiped out by a tsunami.
Was the campaign to find Madeleine in any way productive? How many police hours both here in the UK and in Portugal, have been spent following up false 'leads' and 'sightings'? How many police resources wasted? In the summer of 2007 the media were in a frenzy for Maddie stories, the tabloids were flying off the shelves (supply and demand).
The Portuguese investigation were inundated with sightings of Madeleine and strange looking men who were known to visit the Algarve. With so much publicity, it was inevitable that the switchboards would become jammed. Actually, some might say, a plot was afoot to hamper the investigation by tying the detectives up with bogus leads.
The McCanns certainly demanded that each and every one (including the dreams, psychics and mediums) be fully investigated.
I can never take away the genius of the McCanns' Madeleine Awareness Campaign. It achieved what it set out to do and then some. I am sure it will stand alone as a learning tool for all sorts of 'ologys for years and decades to come.
I actually think it is a bit of a shame that there are no awards for the dark art of spin, I think it would make great entertainment watching a stream of Counts Dracula and Drs. Evil step up to the podium to make their 'greed is good' speeches, especially if they had snippets of how they dunnit. Now there's a great plot for a film!
Grimes also said that he was leaned on by certain people to underplay the dog evidence and was very unhappy about it because he's never experienced this before. Why would you have to lean on an expert in his field if the dogs were inaccurate? Gerry likes to say that he bought the dogs in too, another untruth, they were brought in by court order under a search warrant.
ReplyDeleteAt the behest of Leicester, a force not trusted by Snr.Amaral.
DeleteA child goes missing, cadaver and blood dogs alert, evidence of a deep clean, enough body fluid to have seeped under the floor tiles. Nope nothing to see here, move along!
ReplyDeleteAbduction or dogs, there can only be two black and white choices, never a third, aren't intelligence tricks brilliant? What was that saying again: "if you tell a lie, tell a big one", well it most certainly worked.
DeleteWho lived and who died? Can any of us prove even that?
The forensics didn't identify any of the samples as blood. They did identify someone's DNA in the samples from (underneath) the tiles: the DNA of a Portuguese forensics officer who collected the samples
DeleteTo anonymous 9 Nov at 00.01, asking " are you thick? " I must be, because as a doubter of the abduction story for a long time and having thoroughly read the police files, I never found any reference to Kate McCann explaining away an alert to cadaver odour on her clothes as being due to her having attended deaths. So could you please direct me to where and when she made this statement?
ReplyDeleteI ask for this because you rudely comment that a poster should stick to the facts of the case, whilst posting as fact something which I am almost certain is not.
I think it was Gerrys sister who said Kate had been working with dead bodies when explaining the dogs but Kate who said about taking her daughters cat to work. From memory.
DeleteI'm going to rudely comment again 12:04. I suggest you thoroughly read the police files again and view all the video's, and you may come across it. I don't have the time or inclination to search for information again. I know what I read, but like everything else that could bring an end to this farce, things get whooshed never to be seen again and that's a fact.
Delete08:31 ''They are NOT suspects.'' Oh Really, I can't wait to see the next poor bugger that's thrust into the limelight, Tom, Dick, Harry!! Can't blame them they've already been cleared....Oh hang on I've just had a revelation moment!!!
DeleteRuled out as suspects long time since 19;08 ,Try not to get to upset eh.
DeleteThe McCanns' reactions were normal; they couldn't explain why the dog(s) barked. The PJ lied to them about finding Madeleine's blood and DNA. Other people (mostly journalists) speculated about what may have caused the alerts, or what may have resulted in finding Madeleine's DNA in the apartment or in the boot of the car. At that time the files had not yet been released, so the McCanns didn't know about what really was written in the forensic report. Nowhere in the forensics reports is it mentioned that blood had been found/identified. None of the samples was identified as Madeleine's DNA.
DeleteBut 19.46, what about the Cadaver dogs? They never get it wrong, except once in the last two occasion maybe. And what about that honest, modern day saint, Amaral? A man who has never lied, never hit his wife .....
DeleteYou forgot that he has never been drunk behind the wheel while his child was in the car with him ,20;45
DeleteWhat I like about Goncalo Amaral is that he is human 21:54, with all the human frailties that entails. He is the dogged detective who's home life is allegedly a shambles, that is, he is the popular hero an audience can empathise with because they have faults too.
DeleteFew people can empathise with Kate and Gerry because they are too perfect. And the truth is, very few of us are. The account of family life that Kate gives in her book Madeleine is alien to all of us. It is wooden and contrived. No family with 3 toddlers can survive a holiday, or even a day, without the words divorce or murder being thrown backwards and forwards. And I mean murder of each other here, not the children. When you are vying for child free time every marriage becomes a battlefield. And when you are a weary, keeping up with the Jones's middle class professional, you need a break from being on call to 3 squawking offspring 24/7 more than most. You can kind of see why mummy penguins go off on a treacherous 1000k trek once they have laid their eggs.
Much as we love the little tykes, we usually return from holidays discussing ways in which to divide up the house the dog, the furniture and the kids and vowing only to speak to each other through solicitors. Happily, by the time we get home and opened the Duty Free, all is forgiven and we are planning the next one and maybe having a last minute conga.
It is the sense of unreality that alienates the McCann followers, they can scream it's Goncalo's fault from the top of the roof for evermore, but it won't change the fact that it has always been their own behaviour that has aroused suspicion.
Actually, following on from the above, I have to give credit to HideHo (thought not her death before the 3rd theory) but for all the videos she preserved. They have made a fascinating study.
DeleteI am sorry to see that she has fallen into the trap of believing that she, or indeed anyone, outside of the Portuguese investigation can solve or conclude this case. I agree with Pat Brown that the conspiracy theories muddy the hopes for any future justice. Not that it matters, just as in the Lindberg and Jonbenet case, future scholars of this one, will draw their own conclusions.
Like Gerry I have no problem with people having theories set in stone. It makes for some good banter and a few irate stances, but as we don't yet know what conclusions SY and the PJ have reached, there is not much point in falling out over them. People will read what they want to read.
In my opinion once you start throwing all sorts of other characters into the ring such as Warners staff etc, you have to give them back stories and motives for lying to the police. This is where Bennett has tied himself up in knots. In order to convince the world the 3rd arguido, Robert Murat was involved, he has to smear and discredit the dignified and stoical Smith family. To assume that someone is lying, is very disrespectful, especially when those people have been dragged into this circus through no fault of their own.
Unfortunately, the top 3 conspiracy theories are, in no particular order:
1. Madeleine died before the 3rd
2. Robert Murat is involved and PDL is a den of iniquity with a paedo ring that runs through the heart of the non Christian British establishment.
3. PDL is a den of iniquity popular with the swinging section of the medical profession.
What all of these have in common is the 'if' factor, as in, if your aunt had a knob, she would be your uncle. It goes deep into the realms of 2 degrees of separation. Ie. I once knew an Irish woman who lied, ergo all the Irish are liars, as Bennett or Verdi might say.
In order for theory 1 to be credible, people outside the tapas group must have been part of the infamous pact. This would have involved drawing up plans on the same scale as a Western invasion of the East. Every person drawn into a secret is a risk. Absurd. Not to mention of course, it is wrong and unkind to accuse innocent people of lying and possibly being involved in a heinous crime. Sadly, that is something all three theories have in common.
"What I like about Goncalo Amaral is that he is human 21:54, with all the human frailties that entails. He is the dogged detective who's home life is allegedly a shambles, that is, he is the popular hero an audience can empathise with because they have faults too."
DeleteIn other words, you like him because he reminds you of those old cops that we used to see every night on tv. who always stumbled along and miraculously got their man at the end of every show. Forget the fact that he has perjured, beaten his wife, driven his child while drunk. Also that he seems to have screwed up the whole investigation. The guy's a hero! If only they'd just given him another show he would have solved the crime.
I agree with the conspiracy theories muddying the waters too and a technique used by the UFO Mirage men, if you want a case to lose the facts, chuck on more outlandish spaghetti facts. The only one in this case is why the McCanns have the governments help and you only have to look at Gerry's work for that one, he worked with Blair and is now protected because of that work and probably will always be. Doesn't matter how many of the public, going by the Sun's most recent Facebook page comments at least 98% think they're guilty of covering the disappearance, the Yard is run by the government and have to do what they say. The biggest farce in British justice by far and the most obvious cover up of all because the public don't see an innocent family going out searching and looking for their daughter, all they see is a pair of people who never helped the police with questions; would snigger on interviews, employ a huge PR team to feed out false sightings and employed dodgy detectives (3 times). Buddha says "you're not judged by what you say -but by your actions" A thing the British people have done on the McCanns because they know this isn't a family who's daughter is missing and are liars who raise money that isn't adequately being seen to be used for a search.
DeleteOMG! 'No problem with other people's theories'
DeleteExcept when they disagree with you. No wonder you get on so well with Sonia ' I'm gonna astound the world with my mythical documentary ' Poulton. Another one who lives free speech as long as it doesn't criticise her. Btw, how long has Sonz been embedded in OG? I ask as she is now using that as an excuse for the no show of this, to quote you, work of art.
My life has never depended on whether I see or don't see a documentary 00:42, so I struggle to understand why you (and indeed a number of others) have worked yourselves up into such a frenzy. The time is not right to release the documentary, you are going to have to accept that - you are only torturing yourselves by constantly asking 'are we there yet'.
DeleteMeanwhile, the television and the internet is awash with hundreds if not thousands of fascinating and informative documentaries on all sorts of subjects. Could you not maybe watch one or two of them in the meanwhile? How about settling down for a few hours with a mind improving book? If you broaden your horizons, just a little, it will ease the paranoia. Hope this helps.
And btw, I see anything anyone puts their heart and soul into as a Work of Art 00:42. From a loving prepared meal to an exquisitely chiselled Rodin. Your stuffy attitude as to what is and isn't art is typical of the narrow minded ignorance faced by every artist in history!
DeleteLet me try to give it to you in a nutshell. We are constantly evolving, well some of us are, and so too is art and culture, we have to, or we would all still be admiring cave drawings. The tools with which we create art, have thankfully, also evolved. Who can judge what is or isn't art? Yourself? What, using your own terminology, 'qualifies' you to rule the hard work of others, worthy or unworthy? Out of interest, how does one become an arbiter of good taste? Is it the ability to distinguish between a Manet and a Monet, the profound belief that the Beatles can't compare to Wagner and that Banksy sucks? Or will membership of the cesspit suffice?
Apologies for the delay in replying 19.30. I think the involvement of the British Government began with an error - whoever took those first few calls in Downing Street, immediately latched onto the 'baby in peril' aspect without considering the wider picture.
DeleteThe McCanns were whipping the media up into a frenzy and they the full support and dare I say it, love, of the public and catholics worldwide. It was unthinkable that the parents could have been involved, so no-one thought it.
No doubt within 24 or even 48 hours, they must have become aware that they had majorly fucked up, but by then the big top was up and the McCann circus was in town. Those who took the decision to carry on regardless probably thought that the story would die a natural death within months. They have no doubt watched in horror as the parents have clung onto that world stage using every media resource available ever since. The McCanns like to give the impression that they have VIP support, but I suspect the reality is quite different.
Going slightly off topic, I watched the excellent documentary about Lance Armstrong last night. Lance Armstrong was endorsed by Presidents and A-list celebrities, and from an economic and political perspective, it would have been in everyone's interests to make the doping accusations go away. Arguably, they did for many years.
However, as history shows, truth cannot be suppressed forever. If someone like Lance Armstrong can be exposed, then the chances for the McCanns are remote to nil. The Livestrong (cancer) Foundation (formerly Lance Armstrong Foundation) has a turnover of millions if not billions. The Madeleine Foundation and Missing People are not in the same league.
Lance Armstrong is not a nice person, but he didn't kill anyone. He may have amassed a personal fortune but he is also a genuine philanthropist, no-one can dispute that he helped cancer sufferers. The mighty can and do fall, no-one is untouchable.
I'm afraid I simply cannot imagine any scenario in which a government would cover up for two previously unknown doctors. As for the involvement of Blair and Brown and even the ministers who served under them, they still have wriggle room, they can blame their advisors. No doubt by the time the buck gets passed down through the ranks, we will see a few filing clerks and cleaners get the sack. But the point is moot, they are no longer in power.
I think if the McCanns were being protected in any way, they would have statements about how hopeful they are, and how they still have faith in Operation Grange. They have nothing to support their own theory that Madeleine is still alive.
If I was told a cadaver dog indicated the death of my child I would be in pieces, desperate for more information, would give the police anything they needed to help. I wouldn't be cooly researching sea bass to explain it away, which seems to be a very odd reaction.
ReplyDeleteBut the dogs didn't indicate the death of a child.
DeleteThe forensics didn't identify any of the samples as blood. They did identify someone's DNA in the samples from (underneath) the tiles: the DNA of a Portuguese forensics officer who collected the samples
In time, when everything's calmed down a bit and the PTB have worked out how to solve this trying and difficult dilemma, I hope Rosalinda and Kate can meet up for lunch/brunch or whatever and just have a human to human chat about anything but this blasted case.
ReplyDeleteI would be happy to meet Kate at any time 22:27 and I guarantee my absolute discretion. For me this has never been about a witch hunt, it is the human behaviour and the psychological aspects, that intrigue me. I want to understand why, and I am a good listener.
DeleteYou are both having a laugh 22;27 and 23;23.
DeleteWhy in gods name would Kate ever want to meet up with Ros.?
And your very wrong Ros.This to you has been a witch hunt.IMO.
08.25 God forbid Kate meeting anyone who'd have the guts to ask her questions more like!
Delete22:43.You'd probably end up being called a 'fucking tosser' what a foul mouth she has for an ex doctor it's a good job she no longer practices.
DeleteJaw jaw is better than war war 08:25. And when the time comes, I will be one of the few voices calling for calm and compassion.
ReplyDeleteAnd I'm not a hunter 08:25, I'm afraid the ancient me would have been partaking in the rotting grapes and chiselling poems into a rock while the hunters and gatherers were knocking 7 bells out of the dinosaurs and each other.
Like many of the people who comment on this case I have no personal interest in it whatsoever. The way in which Gerry and Kate live their lives matters not one iota to me. I am not challenging the ideology of one man, one woman and 2.4 kids (well, maybe a bit), for many people it is a fulfilling and rewarding life choice. The sentimental little ole wine drinker me, even gets a little choked up whenever I hear Anthony Newley belting out 'What kind of fool am I?'. But then I remember exactly what kind of fool I was. I would now question the wisdom of partying it up with Anthony Boudain and a shed load of mind altering substances in New Orleans for a week would really be such a good idea? To be fair, I could still sway either way.
I like being alone! Some people just do, why can't society accept that? There is no evidence that the animals went in two by two, few species demand a wedding ring, a shindig, a punch up with the inlaws and a legal document that binds them to Jethro and all the Clampetts for the rest of their lives. They just get on with the recreating.
As for jealousy? Another concept I do not understand. I have never wanted the life Kate has, not even when I was a starry eyed teenager. I am one of those people to whom the idea of shackling yourself to another person for the rest of your life the stuff of nightmares! Whilst I have loved men, the words 'while your up make a cup of tea love' sends shivers down my spine and my brain into overdrive with plots involving ice picks and patios. Ditto, jealousy of the detached house in the 'burbs with room for a pony and the large supportive family. To me that means commitment to a large supportive family I probably don't even like. My time is precious, I don't want the obligations that being part of a large family entails and besides, my fictional heroines would turn into serial killers. For my close family and chosen friends, I have all the time in the world, I'm not a loner Tigerloaf, just very selective.
I have no desire to inflict misery on Kate and Gerry or indeed any living creature. I am intelligent enough and have had enough experience of mental torment to understand that the parents and family must be in turmoil. How could they not be. They need independent, constructive advice. No matter what they have done, they are still human beings and the last thing this case needs is a baying mob.
Sadly, punishment never repairs the damage done. Our human instinct is revenge, but it never makes us feel any better. As for my 'witch hunting'. I have never understood, nor wanted any part in, mob mentality. I have no desire to see anyone burn, and yes, it has made me unpopular all my life. I live with it, lol.
I don't so much want to punish Kate and Gerry as make them stop what they are doing, because they are hurting others and they are hurting themselves. As Confucious said, 'Before you embark on a journey of revenge, dig two graves'.
"aiyoyo Today at 3:50 pm
ReplyDeleteWhy in hell would Kate want to a foul mouth, malicious, mendacious psychopathic lair, a self confessed nutcase and low pond life bogus expert on every topic under the sun anywhere near her?
She's a study subject of psychology students to her blog and she wants to analyse the psychology of Kate over personal chat ? What planet is she on? Fantasizing as usual."
Discuss.
I don`t often visit that grubby little pit these days but on doing so, it`s hilarious - they don`t even realise they are talking about themselves. The best case of `pot kettle black` I`ve ever come across and they can`t even see it. Never known such hatred - pages and pages of it all directed at Sonia and you for absolutely no reason at all - what a bitter and twisted lot they are - a psychiatrist would have a field day. I feel dirty after visiting that forum.
DeleteThey have got themselves worked up into a bit of a tizzy again 15:48, lol - I think it's the viewing and comment figures that irk them the most. Sadly for the cesspit their readers are deserting them in droves because they don't allow debate, it was inevitable.
ReplyDeleteThey are going round in circles discussing the same cluedo ideas and theories as they were 7 years ago as if all their 'hard work and research' is somehow going to end up with star billing in the British library. Sadly, as much as we all love those lightbulb moments in the wee small hours, they are rarely of interest to anyone else. It's why I always advise people who want to write, to write for themselves.
But back to the latest tirade of abuse, some of which was deemed unacceptable for public viewing and a possible suicide risk for a fragile mind that it was deleted by the mod, even though I would deserve it - nice people eh?.
I don't need to get revenge. It cheers me that it is their own lack of anything interesting to say and their blinkered views that will finish them off, they have been hoisted by their own petards. Karma if you like.
Actually, I am starting to become quite fond of this foul mouth, low life degenerate that I am supposed to be, lol. I think of her as 'Cristobella' (cheers tigger), I might even give her a blog of her own! An alter ego more blasphemous than myself, now there's an idea!
The cesspit cannot blame their boring selves for the drop in their numbers, they must blame someone else. The first rule of popular writing is, never preach. Sadly, that is all they do.
What must anyone viewing the Jill Havern site for the first time think of what passes for adult debate there? Spiteful name-calling towards individuals and another forum is allowed to go unchecked - apart from editing of a post today which I was surprised about as it was no worse than many things that haven't been removed.
DeleteThis once excellent forum is now a shambles.
What must anyone viewing the Jill Havern site for the first time think of what passes for adult debate there?
DeleteI'm surprised that forum is still active.Should have been shut down yrs ago IMO.Only read some stuff and that was more than enough for me to know just what kind of sick individuals the members were and still are.
I don't know how the first sentence of my comment at 22.21 is also in the anonymous one at 22.43. That comment is not from me.
DeleteI certainly don't agree that the members there have always been sick and there are still some today who are okay.
What an awful group of people vindictive and nasty beyond belief. What makes me angry is the fact they pretend to care about the fate of Madeleine, but end up discussing anything but.
DeleteThose kind of people never cared about the fate of Madeleine 23;28.
DeleteIt has always been about a witch hunt against the McCann's.Some of the stuff written over the yrs was sick to the core.I never thought people could be so cruel.
I have followed the case long and hard. My only conclusion about the dogs is without forensic supporting evidence, it is not recognised\admissible in a court of law.
ReplyDeleteWhat I will say however is, with any household waste, particularly in a hot country, things like shitty babies nappies would be bag, then placed in the house bin\bag, THEN PLACED in the black heavy duty bag, that would be required to transport such waste to a tip \ collection point, which I understood operated in Portugal. But in my own experience in the UK before the shitty nappies got to the open tip, they would have been bagged THREE TIMES.
I don't see anyone, bunging the household waste, port chops, shitty nappies in the back of a car loose. IN ANY CIRCUMSTANCES.
So, that can't believe the excuse for the pong was household waste.
Are doctos hygienic?
Well it doesn't really matter who made what excuses 18;03 The fact is it was all inconclusive.
DeleteAgreed 18:03, Those doctors must be right mingers no wonder they had to leave the boot of the car open all night!!
DeleteOh dear JATKY2, in the fictional detective world we love our heroes to be flawed, it is all part of the David v. Goliath narrative. We love the dogged old thief takers who break every rule in the book, especially the ones with alcohol and mental health problems. We know that dealing with politics, inter departmental battlegrounds and form filling is pain in the butt - it is the central cry of every crime drama, both in fictional and in fact. When good guys are up against bad guys they can't follow Sunday School rules and if crimes are to be solved, we cannot and should not force them too.
ReplyDeleteGoncalo Amaral is a man who was doing a tough job, a job most of us couldn't and wouldn't want to do. Somehow, even after all he had been through, he still wrote his book with compassion and understanding. That is noble in my eyes. He is still the detective seeking justice for the little girl, the job for him is not over. He still has the right to defend his reputation, and that again is the noble and honourable thing to do.
What Kate and Gerry fail to understand is that most people have faults and flaws and it is the faults and flaws that endear them to others. The more Kate and Gerry put forward their examples of Pleasantville living and parenting, the more people will say wtf.
"We love the dogged old thief takers who break every rule in the book, especially the ones with alcohol and mental health problems. We know that dealing with politics, inter departmental battlegrounds and form filling is pain in the butt - it is the central cry of every crime drama, both in fictional and in fact. When good guys are up against bad guys they can't follow Sunday School rules and if crimes are to be solved, we cannot and should not force them too."
ReplyDeleteIf you think that modern professional police services act like this, then you are living in cloud cuckoo land.
Don't you understand, Amaral, with all his failings, is a very big reason as to why this case was never solved.
As an example, if he had followed modern day procedures, the first place that the Amaral and his colleagues would have searched would have been the apartment. There weren't too many places in that apartment to hide a body.
20.20 Having a group of people who didn't have conflicting statements and a co-operative mother answering questions could've helped too!
Delete''As an example, if he had followed modern day procedures, the first place that the Amaral and his colleagues would have searched would have been the apartment. There weren't too many places in that apartment to hide a body.''
Delete20:20, I agree, the first thing they should have done is search the apartment but when they arrived it was utter chaos by all accounts with lots of people tramping over the crime scene. Gerry howling at the coppers feet, god knows what they must have thought! They were led to believe that Madeleine had been abducted and took their word for it which which I think was a big mistake. Ideally the apartment should have been cleared and searched, and the parents and friends interviewed separately.
From the very beginning they had too much influence on how the investigation should be carried out, you'd think they were the the police. Demanding heat seeking equipment (Gerry) bombastic beyond belief.
Although Dr Amaral made mistakes the amount of interference that took place by Mitchell, our government etc conflicting reports about the samples sent to the now defunct laboratory in Birmingham, is there any wonder the case will never be solved.
I hope lessons have been learnt but I very much doubt it.
Statements weren't taken until after the initial search. The Portuguese police messed up. If they had searched the apartment to look for a child who might have been hiding or where whose body may have been hidden, then the question of whether Madeline was killed or abducted would not now be relevant and you wouldn't be keeping this whole thing alive searching for evidence to satisfy your theories.
ReplyDeleteYou don't seriously believe a body was hidden in the apartment do you ? Rofl.
DeleteHere's another for your spam box. JH figures are not dropping. I think you mean that other forum you all but destroyed with your bile and malice. Some discussion when you only publish your own comments and those to blind to see what a spiteful, jealous witch you are
ReplyDeleteThis is my blog, this my space 00:33 and not a platform for your hangups, no matter how extraordinary they are. There are only so many ways in which you and others like you can tell the world what a spiteful, jealous witch I am and using the same adjectives over and over makes very dull reading. Don't any of you have the wit, the vocabulary and the intellect to denounce me gracefully? lol
DeleteI have no problem with publishing criticism, it's the poor quality I object to ;)
I see Tony is getting at another newbie i'm sure if Jill got rid of him that forum would pick up within a week.Why the need to get at newbies when they want people to join and post,strange way to run a forum.
ReplyDeleteNo doubt the horrible aqilla will get at the newbie too.
It's awful to read, isn't it. It's likely to make anyone else thinking of joining run for the hills.
DeleteI am a contributor to MMM 00:13, nothing more and unfortunately, I am very restricted in what I am allowed to say there. I don't blame Candyfloss or Freedom, they have a nice, non abusive forum where normal folk can interact without harassment. I understand that, which is why I keep more controversial views here.
ReplyDeleteAll the forums are quiet at the moment 00:13, there is nothing happening. If CMoMM are maintaining their readers, I think it is curiosity value because people are aghast at how dreadfully they are behaving! The more they slag off Sonia and I, the more hits they get, lol. Their research threads are the least popular!
At some point the forum owner will have to understand that Tony's lack of boundaries might end with several of them in the dock. For 8+ years his 'research' and 'work' has been devoted to attacking people, from the McCanns, to selected members of their entourage and family (who can forget HIS weirdo obsession with quick sand) to fellow antis. The CMoMM is a catalogue of libel! Even prior to the McCanns he attached himself leachlike to the high profile case of Michael Barrymore and road traffic signs. Do you not see a pattern here Jill?
He wants headlines and he doesn't care who he pisses off to get them. Unfortunately for him, he has no talent. And he lacks the charm and charisma to become a game show host. His mighty works on the McCanns will not be up there alongside The Rise and The Fall of the Roman Empire, because he has contributed nothing to the Madeleine canon other than being a pest. And a nasty one at that.
I am a member of MMM and it was a dreadful time recently when three bullies ran amok, wanting to have you banned and going berserk when their demands weren't met. They have now gone. I doubt that they have learned that thugs can't be allowed to ride roughshod over everyone else but at least the forum is rid of them.
DeleteTony seems to cause problems wherever he goes. I didn't know until recently that he and Stuart Lubbock's father parted company in 2007 and that the Lubbock Trust website collapsed because of him.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.harlowstar.co.uk/Lubbock-Trust-axed-amid-row/story-21920430-detail/story.html
He`s the Muckraker General stirring up animosity wherever he goes yet, once more, we see he is quoting reams of verses from the bible. Sorry, but the man has seriously lost it. I agree with Ros that most people only go there now to view the latest dissension he is causing and its subsequent s*** slinging similar to JATYK2. It seems Jill is happy to allow it maybe because it attracts viewers. But apart from a few current news items there isn`t much to discuss on any forum ATM.
DeleteMany thanks George, interesting reading. I note the article is dated July 2007, looks as though Bennett found himself a rebel without a cause, no wonder he latched onto the Madeleine case.
DeleteHe never wants to profit personally does he, lol. It reminds me of a great and oft used quote from Father Ted 'the money was only resting in my account'!
I actually find it quite amusing 11:59, it's like watching the rows on Big Brother and Jeremy Kyle. You don't want to look, but you can't help it!
DeleteMost of it bothers me not. For most of their accusations I plead guilty as charged, my ability to party was legendry. However, I do object to being called a liar. My inability to tell anything other than the truth has been the cause of my lifelong slow economic growth. When people ask me for the truth, that is exactly what they get, as many of my former employers would no doubt happily confirm.
As for those accusing me of lying about the convent because one strange woman loved it there, let me put forward a couple of questions to you. How can a children's home that is run by a religious insane predatory groomer of boys, who practices Opus Dei be a good environment for a vulnerable child? If you pair him up with an equally religiously insane, sexually frustrated nun with rage issues and give them a dozen vulnerable children to do with what they wish, how do you think that would pan out?
Brenda R may well have been happy. Some people adapt to disciplined regimented environments remarkably well. They don't challenge authority, they simply accept it. I'm sure many passed through the convent indoctrinated with the idea that the nuns' ways, were the right ways. Indeed, many have used their experience to overcome all the hurdles life throws at them and gone on to be remarkably successful.
I am not going to criticise Brenda, because for some people the convent's ways work. They have lived without the 'victim mentality', and in many ways, I now see that they were right and I was wrong. I should not have blamed the nuns or Rands for my poor life choices. I was hiding behind the tragedy of my childhood. I needed someone to blame.
I wanted someone to fix me, because I wasn't clever enough to understand that I had had the power to fix myself all along. It was a bit of a 'ruby slippers' moment. It wasn't the convent's fault, it wasn't the exes fault, or even the fault of my family and friends. I made all the choices myself! Once I accepted that I had no power over the behaviour of anyone other than myself, life improved dramatically!
I would now tell every victim of historic abuse to let it go. Pursuing claims for crimes that happened decades ago, hurts no-one more than yourself. In the very wise words of a contributor here, embrace your family before you embrace your God.
I don't regret bringing my case nor my reasons for bringing it. Children taken into care must be protected, and lessons must be learned from those with actual experience of living in those environments. Vulnerable children seized by the authorities are often moved from one hell hole to another and those with sadistic tendencies towards children are still queuing up to work with kids. Those are the issues we should be focusing on, wasting police time and resources pursuing and imprisoning octogenarians in bath chairs, does nothing whatsoever to protect children now. It merely creates sensational headlines for media spin wars.
Tom Watson is wrong. Very wrong.
Has Hutton changed stance asks the lobotomised Snook? At least they are not calling me Mutton (yet), lol. Not wanting to see the parents of Madeleine tortured and burned in the town square does not translate to changed stance.
ReplyDeleteWhat I am trying to do is highlight the human side of this tragedy, something we should all think about. When someone is on the ropes, is it really necessary to go in for the kill. The recent list of things Madeleine's parents miss about her, is a classic example. Of course the parents miss her! That list was sad on every level. The need for some to tear each itemised memory to shreds is borderline disturbing.
How exactly do the members of the CMoMM forum want this mystery to end? What punishments do they want to see dished out and to whom? What lessons should be learned? What laws do they want changed? If they ever take their eyes and their magnifying glasses away from the minutiae of the last photo and Smithman, do they ever express an opinion on what the eventual outcome of the case should be?
There you go CMoMM, I have thrown you a T-bone. I'm sure a Crime and Punishment (with emphasis on the punishment) thread would be something your more sadistic contributors could sink their teeth into!
Exactly, and what are the children supposed to do, rent a penthouse and get jobs at the London Stock Exchange?
DeleteLOL, have just read Bennett's latest theory. With his Sherlock hat on backwards, he has deducted from one known fact (my not wanting to actually execute the McCanns) that I and my fellow brawny friend, lol are working a cunning plan to exonerate the McCanns. Queue, the revelatory deh, deh, deh, from the piano, lol.
ReplyDeleteThe fact that I have never had more than a passing interest in the stream of suspects divulged thus far, show that the chances of my opting for a patsy are zero. I know there was no abductor, ergo, I have not wasted my time 'researching' media manufactured suspects. I kind of hope Operation Grange can say the same. CMoMM can't.
"Brawny"!!
DeleteOh Verdi, you are accusing me of being duplicitous and telling porkies, whilst you yourself are hiding behind an anonymous avatar. We don't know if you are a man, a woman or a mouse [my money is on rat]. You have no sexuality, no link to the 'real' world, no family, no life, just a 24/7 commentary on the McCann case, or more accurately, a 24/7 venomous commentary on where Sonia and I are going wrong. Is it healthy to devote so much of your life to two women who couldn't give two hoots about you?
ReplyDeleteYou are clearly a pillar of the community, a respected citizen and an arbiter of good taste, so why the need to hide your identity? You must have amazing accomplishments to be so scathing of the efforts of others. Are you an Oscar or Nobel prize winner by any chance?
Are you perhaps a vicar? Maybe a retired army colonel? I fear in the private industry your education would not have taken you above middle management, a glorified filing clerk perhaps? You have obviously never worked in the entertainment, media or education industries, media especially, where you would have been reaching for the smelling salts every 5 minutes. First rule of marketing, if you want to make a product or idea popular, you don't lock yourself in a cave and call everyone around you liars. Especially not the newspapers and the news agencies who have the means to get your message out there. Then try insisting that your product be restricted to a pre-selected and approved audience and you will quickly be shooed back to your cave. Another factor, that rules the media industry out.
If, as a forum your agenda is to inform the 'masses' that the Madeleine case is a cover up, why pick over the CVs of those whose role is convey the message? For the terminally dim, I will say it again, journalists report the news, they do not create it. The idea that we should not believe the news unless the journalist is morally sound is absurd, and it takes us straight into the crazy territory of the cesspit, where they see conspiracies all around them. Sanity has long since left the building. It's like watching a car crash in slow motion.
continues.....
Part 2
ReplyDeleteActually, as there's nothing to talk about at the moment, perhaps we should have a guess at the characters behind the mask competition. I think most of the handful that remain are no more than middle aged frustrated women having a 'doh!' moment because they followed all the rules and their lives still turned out shit.
There are one or two stern wannabe patriarchs in there who believe their word should be final. They believe they can run the outside world in the same way that they run their families and homes. For them the world is black and white, there are no shades of grey. They do things as they have always done and as their fathers did before them. Art is not art unless it is a painting from grand master. Their path is very straight and narrow, there are no alternate routes.
It is kind of sad, but also compelling in a bizarre way. For me, it is an opportunity to throw custard pies at the establishment. I challenge the idea that each of us is compelled, if not forced, to live by society's codes and conventions. The idea that each of us must form part of a couple approved by 'God' and society or we must be weir. All based on a 2000 year old text. Sheesh. To be honest, if I had been Eve, I would have told God and Adam to go sling his hook cause I would have preferred going off partying into the night with Adam's ex, Lilith!
Gotta say,I kind of like the 'onward Christian soldiers' mentality of the firmly embedded members of the cesspit. Pitiful, but with a wide scope to take the pee. It is reminiscent of all the martyrs who chose who chose to have their heads cut off or to be slow roasted over an open fire rather than admit that one God was better than another. Or, the good old days as Tony calls them. One suspects, he may have been an executioner in an earlier life, a role in which he would get to take centre stage and wear a gimp mask.
Ok, ok, I know, I'm my own worst enemy, but I couldn't resist it ;)
IMO Verdi sounds like he was tossed out of Toastmasters and wound up in a Rothley garage bedsit working as an amanuensis for Tony Bennett MA.
DeleteVerdi is female and has been a festering presence around the Amazon page for some years, where she likes to use big words she appears to have picked out of a Brodie's notes guide to Shakespeare. Hence you will come in for plenty of duplicitous, methinks, and possibly even the occasional yea verrily. She uses big words to cover up the fact that she is spectacularly dim. She also throws a lot of tantrums, usually when she doesn't get her own way on Amazon, which is all of the time. She seems to think the page can be controlled by an individual, although any moderation is done by Amazon centrally, with no participants involved, which seems very fair.
DeleteHilariously, Verdi, as Bluesy, vociferously defended the idea that the last photo was a cut and paste job. But that's Verdi for you. M
The romance with Bennett was written in the stars, as Verdi, like Bennett is a racist homophobe who had to be frequently pulled up for their inability to distinguish between homosexual and paedophile.
Verdi's special skill is the long, ignorant rant. If you listen very carefully, you can almost hear the 'plink, plink' as chips of nail polish fly off at speed, colliding with the litre bottle of Asda gin as they go.
Her best friend used to be an even dimmer floosie called General E Speaking, otherwise known as Zodiac Zephr or something like that. However, the fleet must have been in port for ages, as she seems to have been busy lately. Which is probably why Verdi has hitched herself to Bennett's wagon.
Verdi is just too boring to be a woman. Verily! Yea for the gin-guzzling, nay for the nail polish.
DeletePerhaps we could have a poll as to who we think Verdi is? I don't think that too many of us would have to phone a friend for the answer!
ReplyDeleteI did wonder if Aquila had rumbled Mark Willis the other day as she was asking him about being a journalist as he claims to be. Needless to say, he gave her the runaround with silly answers.
ReplyDeleteVerdi is a rather new member isn't he? Yes he mostly agrees with TB, but I am sure he/she is an individual on his own.....And I get the feeling this person is highly educated. He is a master of the English language.
ReplyDeleteHe's a blowarse.
DeleteVerdi is what becomes of TB when he slips into a dress.
DeleteLeft hand on hip,right hand on eyebrow.
He knows he is a sinner but he just can't help himself.
'Poll-y' Bennett
DeleteI think if Verdi were a Master of the English Language, he would be able to state his case without the name calling and the abuse 19:37. His posting style is typical of those with a very limited vocabulary and a very blinkered view of the world.
ReplyDeleteAs for being highly educated, I see no signs of that either. He/she doesn't appear to have any interests outside of the McCann case and scant if any, knowledge of current affairs, popular culture or politics. Being pompous and having a stuffy outdated attitude towards art and culture doesn't equate to being highly educated, it is indicative of a closed mind. Sadly it is the closed minds that are the most ignorant and the most dangerous.
By using the Verdi name Bennett allows himself to do a bit more hand bagging than otherwise.He can then attack strong women ,like Ros and Sonia,who stand up to him.He tries to bully them because they are everything he wants to be,a strong woman.
DeleteHis anger and frustration is because he knows that it is too late in his life to fulfill his transgender fantasy and he must settle for the transvestite thrill he gets as Verdi.
imo
Verdi is a woman living outside the UK.
DeleteShe 'cut her teeth' on mad vivs blog and was very uncomplimentary towards Bennett, unlike her recent ass licking.
I see TB is accepting he is talking rubbish about photos. Again.
ReplyDeleteI do believe TB is losing the plot. Maybe dementia is kicking in?
ReplyDeleteHe's been 'losing the plot' for years. It's just his schtick. I wouldn't worry.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteWhatever happened to j.rob?? He/she once was a poster who wrote insightful posts... Nowadays his/her posts seem to annoy, and quite honestly I do agree his questions are very repetitive and even naive.
ReplyDeletePeneda-Gerês National Park<<<<<<get the dogs here<<<<peat bogs.
ReplyDeleteOh dear - birch writing to bennett for legal advice!!!!
ReplyDeleteTalk about Dumb and Dumber.
But hold on - didn't bennett miss a trick - legal advice doesn't come free - he should be charging the apparently rich man birch.
bennett has been trying to make money out of the Mccann case since he starting selling his stupid leaflets and charging people to join his failed foundation. Why on earth would he give free "legal" advice to the nutter birch?
Deletebennett says:
Delete"if you are to pursue your obsession about a body being under Mrs Murat's driveway then you'll have to think about other ways of doing it."
Note that although he "recoiled" - he then suggests a way forward - he does not say STOP.
Birch and Bennett are natural stable mates, so too Gamble and Bennett.
ReplyDeleteI see Bennett is once again claiming that violent movies lead some people to commit horrific acts against children, and he claims this has been proven time and time again. The fact is, millions watch and enjoy violent and scary movies and 99.9% leave the cinema without feeling the need to buy a machete and go on a killing spree.
Of course those who commit horrific acts against children will look for something other than themselves to blame. Not my fault guv, I hold the makers of Grand Theft Auto solely responsible.
The kids who killed Jamie Bulger may have watched Chucky movies back to back, but their problems stemmed from the total lack of love, care and parental guidance in their troubled homes. They were kids who's parents had no time for them.
The way in which we behave is learned from our parents, not the images we see on a film or television screen. Our characters are established before we know how to switch a computer screen on. If our parents are caring and compassionate, then we will be too.
Those who commit horrific acts against children come from highly dysfunctional backgrounds - what they view on their computer screens is the least of their problems.
So very true! Of course, from time to time nature kicks in so the behavioural pattern is not entirely learned from our parents. Siblings with the same upbringing can end up being completely different. But horror movies don't make murderers,as You say some use it as an excuse....
Delete@ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton13 November 2015 at 16:58
Delete"Those who commit horrific acts against children come from highly dysfunctional backgrounds"
Remind us of you background again?
Unlike you, she didn't go to charm school.
DeleteSo because of my background I commit horrific acts against children 20:16?
DeleteErr, I'm not the one who 'lost' a 3 year old on a family holiday.
Verdi is Bennett. Amongst others on that strange site.
ReplyDeleteRos, any update on the Police stuff, regarding you, Sonia and Andrew from MMM?
ReplyDeleteTony been very quiet about it since?
I haven't heard anything from the police 23:56, it appears Tony's dream of having me arrested and thrown in a cell, is as batshit crazy as his other master plans. He should be 'done' for wasting their time!
DeletePetermac ?
ReplyDeleteDid you sit a matrix course for Common Purpose
16:58, ''Birch and Bennett are natural stable mates, so too Gamble and Bennett.''
ReplyDeleteNeigh, even that talking horse Mr Ed from years ago made more sense!!! LOL.
Whoa there Bess, you have to think 08:40 - is that what stumped you?
DeleteIf you were a regular reader you would understand that all my work has subtext and I often throw in 'points to ponder' 08:40, it makes it much more interesting for all of us.