Wednesday, 6 April 2016

GERRY'S HACKED OFF


If Gerry McCann was the best spokesman Hacked Off could muster for their latest appeal, then their movement is pretty much over.  Did Gerry draw the short straw? Or did he push himself forward in the belief that he was best equipped, the most articulate and possibly, the most maligned. 

It is astonishing that Gerry still believes he has the power to win over an audience.  In his own eyes, he is an orator and a leader, people naturally fall into line behind him.  But they don't.  Not because, we haven't seen enough of him, but because we have seen too much.  The McCanns are takers, but with a capital 'T' - everytime they appear on our screens they want something from us, usually cash.  Their USP is their ability to whine, constantly.  They are always being denied something they believe they are entitled to.  And of course, with the number of lawyers they have in their employ, they can always find something. 

They want the front pages and the headlines, but they want them run by their publicity team, lawyers and spokesmen first.  And they want more compensation, they were financially recompensed for the damage done to their Fund Search in the UK, but not, as Gerry pointed out to Lord Leveson, for the damage done globally. 

The McCanns have now turned on the press because they no longer have control.  Quite simply McCann headlines no longer equate to massive sales, they are yesterday's news.  Whilst the McCanns held the public's interest, they could demand anything, but 9 years have passed, the world has moved on. 

One of my favourite poems* begins with the line 'Laugh and the world laughs with you, weep and you weep alone'.  Kate and Gerry have little to laugh about, they have committed themselves and those around them to a lifetime of searching for a child who cannot be found.  They dare not be seen laughing because it betrays the kind of image they want to project.  They are trapped in a time warp because they cannot, or will not, let their USP go.

If they had accepted their loss and used all the millions donated for an altruistic cause that benefited hundreds or even thousands of children, their grief would now be tempered by the knowledge that so much good has been done in their daughter's name.  At this time, the Madeleine Fund (not a Charity), has been for the benefit of only ONE child and her family.  Or more accurately, for one family, because there are no memorials for Maddie.  In Kate and Gerry's quest to protect their own names, the name of Maddie seems to have been forgotten.

Unfortunately for Gerry, his calls for restrictions on the press have also passed their sell by date.  The public's outrage at the intrusion on Milly Dowler's family (and that was their key appeal), has been pacified, wrists were slapped and lessons were learned.  Just as they were when Princess Diana died, a time when paparazzi fever was at a peak. 

Whilst Gerry McCann is well known for his wider agenda, he is completely clueless when it comes to the bigger picture.  It may be that he has never picked up a history book, but if he had, he would see that democracies are dependent on freedom of the press.  A lot of people have fought and died for the freedoms we now have.  Restricting the news is one of the first steps towards tyranny. 

The watching world are all too well aware that Gerry McCann has much to hide, which again suggests Hacked Off have all but thrown in the towel, and we know darn well why he wants prior approval of everything McCann related.  Although not officially, and we are not allowed to say it, Gerry McCann is one of the main suspects in the disappearance of his daughter.  I expect most of the Crimewatch audience fell off their chairs when a giant picture of his doppelganger appeared, thinking wow, what are the chances of the main suspect looking exactly like the child's father? 

The McCanns have been unable to stop the revelation of the blood and cadaver dog findings or Kate's refusal to answer the questions of the Portuguese police.  All of these facts are in the public domain, but if Gerry had his way, they wouldn't be. 

The heroes of the Journalist world are those who go where angels fear to tread.  And thank all the Gods there may be for that, because they are the guardians of the masses, it is fear of exposure that keeps the rich and powerful in check. Those with nothing to hide don't give two hoots what the press say about them. 








* Solitude by Ella Wheeler Wilcox

171 comments:

  1. Excellent analysis of the Mccanns and the arrogance they display.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Cracking piece. Given the scale of the McScam which was fuelled by the media, Gerry's sheer audacity is breathtaking. The McCanns themselves were very happy to use the media in their so-called 'search' and to drum up money for their fraudulent fund. Keeping Madeleine in the news with all the bogus 'sightings' knowing full well what really happened. Their sheer cheek is astounding.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Brenda was a victim. A victim of press intrusion fully endorsed by Gerry. His hypocrisy knows no bounds.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Brenda's tragedy was a prime example of what can happen when the power of the media is unleashed. If it hadn't been for Gerry demanding an example be made of a member of the public, Brenda's tragedy could have been the clincher for their privacy laws. That the hounding of Brenda by the press was instigated by the so called victims of press intrusion is astounding. As you say 16:44, his hypocrisy knows no bounds.

      Delete
    2. Brenda was nothing but a fucking TROLL..

      Delete
    3. All that fury about Brenda being a TROLL can't be doing you any great favours @14:10

      'Troll' wins payout from family of missing Spanish boy

      An alleged internet troll who posted malicious comments about the disappearance of a boy who went missing in the Canary Islands nine years ago has won compensation from his parents after they named and shamed him.

      "It would have been cheaper to travel over to Murcia and give the bloke a slap," commented Suarez after the ruling.

      http://www.thelocal.es/20160429/fury-as-troll-wins-pay-out-from-parents-of-missing-boy

      Sadly, Brenda's only payout was to be named and shamed in to taking her own life. After all, she was an easy target, which proved to be far less costly. Sooner or later you may come across a REAL TROLL and you may be tempted to unleach your fury and give someone a slap.

      Delete
  4. My feeling is that this is motivated by him wanting a foot in the door to a political career but also suspect it is a mistake for him. I'd be surprised if he has backing more powerful than Murdoch who has the means to make or break such aspirations.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Has he been speaking recently on behalf of hacked off surely not

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good point, the letter comes from the McCanns' home and there is no Hacked Off logo.

      He does still seem to have the support of Hugh Grant however, who praised the letter on twitter, but odd imo, that he is not a signatory to it. I suppose it would be embarrassing for the 'A' listers to admit that the Prime Minister won't speak to them.

      Delete
    2. So Ros - you realise now that he was a spokesperson for those who signed the letter (issued from his address) and was not a spokesperson for Hacked Off group.

      Delete
    3. Sounds like there has been a parting of the ways 23:30, is Gerry no longer part of Hacked Off?

      Delete
    4. You obviously failed to look at the Hacked Off website before you posted your blog and your comment at 01.02 Ros.

      "If Gerry McCann was the best spokesman Hacked Off could muster for their latest appeal, then their movement is pretty much over."

      It wasn't a Hacked Off appeal.

      They didn't pick him as their spokesperson - he was speaking on behalf of the people who signed the letter. They haven't distanced themselves from him - otherwise they would not have reported it on their website.

      Delete
  6. 16.35 Yes the McCann's did use the media to keep their daughters name in the public domain, it is what parents of a missing child want to do, didn't you know? For their child to not be forgotten, for people to remember the missing child and look out for her.

    Now please tell me the difference between having your daughter in the news in order to keep the public looking for her and printing libel?

    As for the fund, which was set up as people wanted to help the search for Madeleine and set up for Madeleine as that is who the people wanted to help look for and so couldn't have been shared with other children as Cristobel says. Where is your evidence it is fraudulent? Do you honestly believe that a fund would be allowed for nine years to keep going if it was fraudulent? Do you not think that someone along the way wouldn't have let their concerns be known to the authorities if it was fraudulent? If so many people dislike the McCann's then why hasn't someone reported the fund?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The McCanns have been phenomenally successful in keeping the name of their daughter in the public eye, kudos. However they are operating under the mistaken belief that they can control the media and public opinion.

      Their demands that only 'good' stories are published about them are absurd. No-one on the globe has that power, not even the Queen, Donald Trump or Joe Stalin when he ruled the entire Eastern bloc.

      The McCanns want public life and celebrity, but they don't want the negative side that comes with it. They want a specific law that will protect them from criticism and their children from reading anything negative about them in the future. Their desires stem from pure megalomania and will never be attainable, but something those high priced lawyers they employ will continue to pursue as long as long as the cash keeps coming.

      As for the Fund, it was born out of compassion, people were touched by the plight of a little girl, they wanted to help. At that time the world had little idea of what was going on behind the scenes. Team McCann with their daily news reports were spinning them a yarn of epic proportions, a yarn involving incompetent police who were trying to frame the victims.

      I am not familiar with Company Law 08:59, however it is clear even to me, that the financial reports submitted by the Fund are the opposite of transparent. I remember Judge Tugendhat asking for a copy of Enid O'Dowd's report at the Civil Trial against Bennett. Writing to Companies House seems like something Bennett would do, so the fact that no authority appears to have investigated the Fund is strange. It may be that the Fund is operating within the parameters of the Law, but whether it is moral and honourable, is an entirely different question.

      Saying the Fund 'Couldn't' assist other children is a complete cop out. Gerry and Kate are directors, they can change the Company's objectives whenever they want!

      Delete
  7. Cristobel, the blood and cadaver dogs findings, were not evidence of anything, as Martin Grimes said himself.

    Gerry McCann is NOT one of the main suspects in Madeleine's disappearance at all, you are making things up. Were you asleep when SY said the McCann's and their friends are not suspects? Or are you of the opinion that SY have spent years and millions of pounds just to arrest the McCann's? You fail to read the facts of the case and you make things up to fit what YOU think.

    If you read the statements in the police files you will find that Gerry McCann was sitting in the Tapas Bar when Mr. Smith saw the man carrying a child. There is no way at all that Gerry could have been that man. Though that doesn't fit for you does it, have you actually READ the whole of the Police Files?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Those are some pretty heavy duty rose tinted specs you have got on there 09:07. The findings of the blood and cadaver dogs may not count as evidence in Court, but they were enough to change the entire course of the Portuguese investigation and enough for them to abandon the search for a live child.

      As for SY saying Gerry McCann is NOT a suspect, I am sure it was for humanitarian reasons, the lives of the McCanns and their friends would have been intolerable if they hadn't. They may have said the McCanns weren't involved, but in 4+ years they have not provided one iota of evidence to support the McCanns abduction story, nothing that points the finger away from them.

      As for the police files, I was having another read of them the other night, actually the more you read them the easier it becomes to distinguish who is, and who isn't telling the truth.

      Your assertion that there is no way Gerry could have been the man the Smith family saw has not been proved. The McCanns and their friends refused to return to PDL for a police reconstruction, (they didn't do one for SY either), so confirming Gerry's alibi has never been possible. Gerry's alibi comes from his friends, and he provides an alibi for them, they are all sticking to the timeline they prepared using a page from Maddie's sticker book, on the night she vanished.

      Delete
    2. Bjorn/Sweden here
      Hi

      This is still a Portuguese crime case, so if the S Y have freed the McCanns from all suspicion, as you insinuate, they must have done so arbitrarily and self- violently.

      In their final report dated 21.07.08.(Processo 17/ pages 4592-4649)The Joint General Prosecutor Joao Melchior Gomes and The Republic’s Prosecutor José de Magalhaes e Menezes state the following;
      ”….. it was not possible to obtain any piece of evidence that would allow for a medium man, under the light of the criteria of logics, of normality and of the general rules of experience, to formulate any lucid, sensate, serious and honest conclusion about the circumstances under which the child was removed from the apartment …..she is dead, as seems more likely.
”
      As far as we know,nothing has been found by the S Y in their joint venture operation with the Portuguese P J, apart from that the “Tannerman” has finally been ruled out by them, but the Portuguese P J did that more or less 6 years earlier.
      As for Gerry sitting at the tapas restaurant when Kate alerted may be correct. Nobody is lying about that, I suppose, but, having read some of the witnesses’ statements, I’m inclined to believe that it was later, sometime between 22.00 hrs and 22.20 hrs, that she came running down to Gerry and all their friends. Maybe a quarter past ten. I also disregard Russel O’Brians time sheet, because all of the tapas 9 could not have had synchronised watches and exactly the same perception of time that evening. It is just impossible! If this would be a staged abduction, then Gerry would not be so stupid to be in a place where nobody could give him an alibi, so the plan must then have been to be among his friends, when Kate was supposed to alert, but I doubt that Kate alerted precisely at 22.00 hrs. If it was later, which I have reason to assume, that would also explain why the Police was alerted so “late” at 22.40 hrs. I find it hard to believe that the McCanns and their friends were running around for more than half an hour before the police was called, given that both Kate and Gerry “knew” that there had been a kidnapper, who for each minute lost got a better head start. Don’t you agree?




      Delete
  8. The whole issue of yesterday, is WHY? Why now?

    The McCanns have ahead of them a positive platform to start they annual appeal on the 3rd May, so why muddy the waters with this side show & particularly to rattle the cage of the Cameron, having just been granted another £96k for a four man team to carry on another six months.

    But then - when has behaviour been normal in this case.

    And where was the PR team & CM to give advice - or really did they not see the negative response coming.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why now? Who knows, I had a peep at the apparently inactive Hacked Off site, and there is an announcement along similar lines dated 5th April. It doesn't seem to have caused much of a stir, not even one comment. The controversial Gerry McCann always attracts media attention, and of course there is no such thing as bad publicity.

      I don't know if Gerry and Kate refuse to listen to advice, or if they act purely on their own instincts, in any event their recent publicity campaigns have been disastrous.

      Gerry looks wrecked, he is no longer the uber confident man in charge. He looks drained and ever so slightly dishevelled, like a salesman who has had a particularly bad month, but won't give up.

      He has aged as rapidly and cruelly as Kate, and for her there has to be some justice in that. I have to say, it pains me to write in these terms, I take no pleasure whatsoever in seeing anyone defeated, victory is never all its' cracked up to be.

      Kate and Gerry are clearly living under enormous stress and keeping up the pretence is taking its physical toll. They have had the wind knocked out of their sails, yet still they continue.

      And therein lies the madness, heaven knows the corrosive effects this madness is having on those close to them. It is cruel in my opinion, that all those responsible adults in that circle have allowed it to continue for so long. Their silence is their shame.

      I actually felt pity for Gerry yesterday, he has lost the plot and it shows. The public can see that his priorities are completely skew-whiff, he is clearly more concerned with his and his wife's good name, than his missing daughter! So people said nasty things about you Gerry, well you have been financially compensated several times over and beyond your wildest dreams. Get over it.

      Gerry I think is still working on the wider agenda 09:20 and building a defence. And I have no doubt media intrusion will form part of that defence. Is it possible for them to have a fair trial given all the media coverage?

      I have got a 'where we are now' blog in draft at the mo, I think I'll just go polish it up and publish it!

      Delete
    2. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 April 2016 at 13:10

      When you pass your opinion about the way the parents of a missing child look then you open yourself up to attack. You said:

      "He has aged as rapidly and cruelly as Kate, and for her there has to be some justice in that."

      You should not be passing your personal opinion of the appearance of anyone else.

      I refer you to the photos of yourself which I decline to comment on.

      Delete
    3. I am not happy to pass opinion on Gerry's appearance, but then again, I am not going to ignore the blatantly obvious. He is clearly not thriving.

      And yes, I have any number of horror pictures of myself from the past, all of which I can relate to specific events. For example when I did the ITV interview, I had just heard that my lifelong best friend had been found dead. I accept that I have looked bad during my bad times, I'm a manic depressive, it comes with the territory. I'm not putting on an act, I'm not trying to pretend things are OK when they are not.

      If you want to pretend Gerry looks happy and confident, crack on, but it's all emperor's new clothes to me.

      Delete
    4. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 April 2016 at 18:17

      I listened to what Gerry had to say - not for a minute did I try to examine his personal appearance. Words are important to me.

      Why did you say there is justice in how Kate looks when she was not even in the interview????

      Delete
    5. At least we know what Gerry's grandfather looked like now.

      Delete
    6. If you simply listen to the words to the exclusion of everything else, you are missing about 80% of the message that is being communicated. Pretending Gerry looked well and performed well, may feed his ego, but you aren't doing him any favours. If you care for him, then the correct emotion is concern.

      As for Kate, yes I know she didn't appear, but in recent years she looks as though she has suffered more from all the stress than Gerry. From yesterday's appearance, it looks as though Gerry has caught up.

      Delete
    7. Gerry looked like he had been sleeping in his car and showering with Lynx.

      Delete
  9. Cristobel, I'm not wearing rose tinted specs I am seeing it as it is.

    Amaral took the DNA results and said 100% of Madeleine's DNA was found, which isn't true. He then came out with his theory. All other avenues were then ignored.

    How do you know that SY have not found evidence to support abduction, have you read something I haven't as SY have said they are not going to give details about the case. Oh, wait, you've come up with your own decision again haven't you.

    Dianne Webster said that Kate said as soon as she was in hearing of the table 'she's gone Gerry' now why would Kate say Gerry if he wasn't sitting at the table? and give me one good reason why Dianne Webster would put herself in a position of lying to the police? Gerry was then seen by a waiter searching for Madeleine, why would he lie? Then the search groups were gathering just as the waiter shut the Tapas Bar, are you saying Gerry carried Madeleine's body through groups of searchers for all to see?

    The timeline was what the PJ wanted, when asked if they shouldn't be putting the news of Madeleine being missing to the television news, the friends were told by the Police 'that is what we want' meaning the timeline. READ THE STATEMENTS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Who cleaned the apartment to a clinical standard, and how much time would that have taken to achieve?

      Delete
    2. The specialist dogs were sent out from Scotland Yard to do a job at the suggestion of British search expert Mark Harrison. And they did their job - they alerted to the scents they are trained to alert to, blood and cadaver.

      Are you saying the PJ should have ignored the dogs' findings? If so, what was the purpose of sending them out there? As for all the other sightings (wild goose chases)and psychic visions, I am sure they got all the attention they deserved.

      The tapas group, including Dianne Webster have had ample opportunity to prove they are telling the truth, starting with attending a physical reconstruction of their version of events.

      Having read the statements of the tapas group and the statements of the Smith family several times, I know with certainty who to believe. As Gerry said himself, in a moments of madness, who knows what people are capable of.

      Martin Smith, unknown to himself, was using the very efficient memory retrieval system stored within his brain. Seeing Gerry walking down the steps of that plane with a child in his arms triggered his brain to search and find a similar image. It was beyond his control, our brains do it automatically, its how we know a potato is a potato, we have seen one before.

      However, the troubled Mr. Smith then had to do battle with his conscious, knowing the huge implications his statement would have on 'the crime of the century'. Naming the father as the man he saw could have made him Public Enemy No. 1.

      My heart went out to Martin Smith on reading his statement, it is plain to see the agonies he went through. The outcome of this case could rest on what he saw that night, and that is a burden no-one would want to bear.

      I have nothing but respect for the Smith family. They asked for privacy and because they mean't it, the media have complied. It's a shame Gerry and Kate haven't cottoned on, that it really is, that simple.
      ....continues

      Delete
    3. You ask, how do I know SY haven't found evidence to support an abduction. I'm pretty sure if they had such evidence, they would have relieved the pressure on Gerry and Kate by announcing their findings. It would be horribly cruel not to.

      Gerry and Kate have been desperate for SY to clear them, to pronounce them innocent. In recent years there has been no indication from SY that Madeleine is alive. In fact the opposite message was sent out by the super large plant and heavy digging machinery in PDL, as they were trying to ruin Goncalo Amaral in Lisbon. The digs were so close to Apartment 5A, it was almost as if they were digging up the McCanns back garden.

      Delete
    4. 7 April 11:44

      You ask for one reason why D.W. would put herself in the position of lying to the police.

      Perhaps to try and protect her daughter, as mothers do. After all Fiona had attempted calumny under Portuguese law.

      It should also be noted DW never mentioned Gerry in her first statement regarding the tapas so maybe it is best to read all the statements and not pick and mix.

      Delete
  10. The press won't just sit back and take this from the likes of him. "McCann was adamant that if nothing is done then the Inquiry would have been a waste of time." - Notice how they're already beginning to drop the 'Mr' when referring to him.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm wondering if other bloggers are taking their cue from here. The following sentence is from a well known blog which was published today: "Note how for the press it’s just the McCanns and no longer Mr McCann or Gerry."

      Delete
  11. Gerry wants it known he has enemies in the state, when/IF they are charged then they have the 'press barons', the prime minister, PJ, Portuguese & UK public against him & his co defendants, probably hoping to have the case thrown out on a technicality, the only force who has avoided his criticism up to now is Operation Grange

    Of course that will happen when the £95K is all spent up on 'searching'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Some people are never happy 13:46, all his enemies at one time gave him anything he wanted. They even made an example of an ordinary member of the public to show what would happen to people who continued to criticise himself and his wife.

      The 'everybody hates us' defence will be interesting for sure. The McCanns can no longer claim the police forces of Portugal and the UK have been looking for a quick, cost cutting, way out. Both countries have invested millions into the investigation and probably more time than all other missing child cases put together.

      I suppose the next question is, what do they have on the PM, the PJ, Portuguese and UK public? Gerry says in his letter of 6.4.16, some of us have spoken in private to the PM. Whenever Gerry says things like that, I always get a sense of menace, it's as if he threatening to say things the recipient doesn't want him to, if he doesn't get his own way.

      They have possibly done their worst with Goncala Amaral and the PJ, unless the finale includes a declaration from SY that the loss of Madeleine was due to the incompetence of their counterparts in Portugal, and I just don't see that happening.

      The turning of the public, will be blamed on bloggers like myself and journalists envious of Kate's trim figure and handsome husband. They will claim the hate has been instigated by evil people who use the internet to prey on vulnerable families. They have created images of haters and pitchforkers and they will use that mythology for all it's worth. Happily for them, Bennett has given them plenty to work with.

      I expect the war rooms of Team McCann are either buzzing with wider agendas or neglected and gathering dust. The oomph is long gone, every avenue has been exhausted. There is seemingly no way in which to get the public back onside.

      continues....

      Delete
    2. As I said earlier, the McCanns are restricted one USP, they cannot move on until they accept that Madeleine is dead. They are trapped in a prison of their own making, committed to a pointless search forever more in order to keep up appearances.

      They cannot get that which the desire most, the thrill of media attention, on the basis of their natural charisma or good deeds, all they have is their constant pleas for the public to help them.

      I think the fun they had with the media in the summer of 2007, is long since over, it may have been easy peasy to manipulate them while McCann stories were flying off the shelves, but when they stopped becoming profitable, their purpose was served.

      Yes indeed, Operation Grange. Thus far no 'rogue' detectives have been removed from the case, DCI Redwood handed over to DCI Wall without any ado, and the McCanns have been telling us throughout that they are happy with the investigation.

      They really don't think these lies through before they come out with them. Who, in their right mind, could possibly be happy living with a live police investigation? Innocent or guilty, your life would be pure hell. Never mind privacy on the net, how about privacy in your own home? A spell in Guantanamo would at least provide a bit more 'me' time.

      Do the McCanns know what is going on? If they have been reassured by the police that they are looking for a live child, then why don't they reassure their 600k+ fans that their 'searching' is not in vain.

      If the police are not keeping the parents updated, then why are they not pleading for information? Why are they not demanding an explanation for Operation Grange closing, especially as there appears to be no result?

      Once again, their behaviour is contrary to everything we would expect to see in parents of a missing child. They fought so hard for a review with the launch of a book and a Petition, yet they are so passively accepting that will be back to square one, but with a lot less money.

      I think this case has reached that closing in stage where the truth can't be supressed any more. Those continuing to claim there was an abduction are seen as seriously deluded or downright dishonest.

      The case of Madeleine McCann fatally wounded the credibility of the tabloids. It so perfectly illustrated the way in which our Government and Media lie to us. With the case of Madeleine, even the average Sun reader could see that what he was reading in his newspaper was entirely different to what was being said online.

      Unfortunately for those who would control the press, news and information is no longer restricted by borders or one sided perspectives. We are all free to look up whatever we want. The malevolent use of this missing child to usher in restrictions on freedom of speech is one of the issues that irks me most in this case.

      Delete
  12. How are their sex lives these days? Kate hasn't given us an update in the press for a while now.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh gawd I don't really want to know 13:59, but going by Gerry's appearance yesterday, I would guess it is non existent.

      The main problem the McCanns have right now, is trying to pre-empt the findings of Scotland Yard with their 'unfair trial by media' card. They need the public's support and they need cash for their legal fees - £750k is drop in the ocean to lawyers in the calibre of Carter Ruck.

      Some suspect huge amounts of money was stashed via those well known money launderers Metodo 3, it's a possibility - the £50k a month retainer was exorbitant by anyone's standards and the McCanns have never made any attempt to get their money back.

      Equally as likely I think, most of those millions were spent on high income professionals. Lawyers
      (almost immediately), spin doctors, reputation management and making Goncalo Amaral experience misery and fear. And now they need more money to do more of the same.

      I am actually feeling a bit sad for Kate and Gerry today, they are shackled to each other like it or not. They are doomed to keep up the abduction story and the perfect couple scenario forever more.

      Delete
    2. Their sex life could actually be quite good as they both look absolutely fucked whenever you see them nowadays!

      Delete
  13. Very interesting blog Cristobell.

    But how about a suggestion to you to take things on a little from commentary.

    Why don't you, or your followers, try and move the story on.

    The two key people who organise Hacked Off are DAISY COOPER (@libdemdaisy) and DR EVAN HARRIS (@drevanharris).

    Why don't you tweet, or call them direct, and simply ask who authorised the media rounds yesterday. From that, we will find out a little more information, and you might be able to deduct a little more from Gerry's overall involvement in that initiative.

    These coordinated activities do not happen by accident (McCann interviews; CR Guardian media piece) so see if you can find out who did the organising.

    To pre-empt a reply such as 'why don't you?' -- a simple answer: I can't be arsed. Bigger fish to fry.

    Yours, a helpful minion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ah, I love minions, the little yellow ones with goggles on.

      Interesting post and maybe someone will be tempted to dig a little further. It's not my kind of thing however, I don't really care one way or another about these peoples' hurt feelings.

      I was as shocked and outraged as anyone else that the phone of Milly Dowler and the phones of those who's lives had been hit by tragedy, were hacked, I'm so sorry that happened to the Dowlers especially, they are such a dignified family and their grief is tangible, but even so, new laws won't change human behaviour. There will always be rogue journalists out there just as there will always be rogue doctors.

      As for those who make their living out of their public personas, they really must accept the bad with the good. As the irritating guy on Big Brother said (constantly), that's showbiz. If you don't want people talking about you, stay out of the limelight. Obscurity is one of the easiest commodities to come by, ask Andrew Ridgely.

      Gerry and Kate use the media to appeal to the public for help with their search and cash for their Fund. You can't just ask people for money and not tell them what it is for. That Gerry and Kate are not as they appear to be, is a matter of great interest to the general public, and all the new legislation in the world won't make that interest go away.

      From a brief glance at Hacked Off, it would appear that the campaign is fizzling out. In the whole scheme of things, the suffering of these victims has greatly diminished in value.

      I don't understand why the Hacked Off victims are segregated into different groups, and I don't know they didn't all unite to sign Gerry's letter.

      Naturally, I have my suspicions. I know if I were involved in a cause or campaign, I would not want my name aligned to the McCanns. One of the most uncomfortable aspects of Gerry's TV appearance yesterday, was the lack of support for him online.

      Anyway, many thanks for your contribution it raises some interesting questions.

      Delete
  14. JJ why would Dianne agree to protect her daughter, why would Fiona agree to lie? If Madeleine had been found they would all have been in serious trouble, why would they all put their livelihoods on the line, that is ridiculous.

    The fact that Dianne Webster didn't mention Gerry in her first statement means nothing, it all depends on the questions they were asked at the time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Perhaps they KNEW she was never going to be found. I often asked the same question of people who mistrust Martin Grimes why would he misinterpret or guide the dogs to a false alert. He was certain that when the dogs alerted that for him it was conclusive evidence and the little girl was never going to be found

      Delete
    2. 7th April 17.04

      You obviously have not followed this case.

      DW was asked to state for the record, by the police, what movements to and from the tapas table occurred that night.

      She was asked by the police who was there in 5a. Her reply was, Kate and the twins. No mention of Gerry.
      She was asked by the police on her second visit to 5a, was Gerry there? She replied, yes but she could not recall Gerry there on the first occasion.
      It is all there in black and white in her police statement.

      You obviously have an axe to grind for the Macs, but are completely clueless and have nothing constructive to add,why is that?

      Delete
  15. Cristobel the ones who decided to post nasty comments about Gerry McCann yesterday, when all he was doing was voicing what others are saying, are the usual posters who post negative posts whatever the McCann's do or say.

    http://hackinginquiry.org/mediareleases/victims-of-press-abuse-write-to-the-prime-minister-these-solemn-promises-have-not-been-kept-and-we-urge-you-to-honour-them-now/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Anonymous7 April 2016 at 17:07 - agreed - see my post

      Anonymous7 April 2016 at 16:52

      Ros and other jumped in far too soon with their usual denigrating remarks about the Mccanns.

      Delete
  16. Whilst all the usual suspects were there 17:07, myself included, the McCann hashtag had a huge influx of new commentators most of whom were irritated by Gerry's constant demands. For a few hours Gerry's name was trending.

    This insistence that there is only a tiny handful of people in a dark corner of the internet who disbelieve Kate and Gerry is no longer sustainable. Every McCann news story attracts comment and now the comments are overwhelmingly negative. It seems the tiny anonymous handful are the McCann supporters.

    Gerry should have had a bit of a reality check before taking on the newspaper barons and Freedom of Speech, he is not as powerful as he thinks he appears to have very little support, even from the other 'groups' that make up Hacked Off.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Cristobell, you don't know what you are talking about, the usual crowd were out in force yesterday, usually identified by their idiotic posts, such as 'where's your appeal for Maddie' 'it's your fault' blah blah blah, they probably didn't even understand what he was talking about.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately, Gerry does not inspire viewers to research the clauses in depth. Even now I still have no urge to look up Section 40, I doubt many have, the message was lost.

      Delete
  18. "I remember when David Cameron claimed to be passionate about change in the press industry, when he talked a great deal about “the victims” and about ending the suffering of innocent people at the hands of unscrupulous newspapers.

    I was one of those victims. I was a law-abiding retired teacher in Bristol who was all but accused of murder by most of the national press, and I was among those who, encouraged by the prime minister, told their stories to the Leveson inquiry.

    Cameron met us privately and promised us – just as in public he promised parliament and the country – that he would ensure things changed.

    Now he is breaking those promises. Instead of delivering change, his government is stealthily attempting to restore the status quo that existed before the Leveson inquiry.

    If they succeed, our national newspapers will remain unaccountable to any meaningful regulator, justice in libel and privacy cases will remain far beyond the reach of most ordinary people, and the truth about who was responsible for wholesale press law-breaking will be buried forever.

    In other words, we will be back in the world where prime ministers and press bosses exchange cosy text messages and go horse-riding together while newspapers are left free to trash the lives of innocent citizens in pursuit of higher sales.

    Perhaps many people reading this will just shrug. What did I expect? Wasn’t it ever thus? No doubt that is the reaction Cameron is hoping for, as are the owners of the Sun, Mail, Express, Mirror and the Telegraph.

    But the wellbeing of law-abiding people is at stake, and we have no reason to be defeatist. In 2011-13 Cameron made his promises in response to overwhelming public and parliamentary pressure for action, so now we need to raise our voices again to ensure he keeps them.

    There are two simple things he must do, which will make a vital difference.

    Section 40 will guarantee every citizen access to low-cost justice in libel and privacy cases

    First he must order his culture secretary, John Whittingdale, to bring section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013 into effect. This is a vital measure, and although in 2013 Cameron promised it would be delivered, Whittingdale wants to shelve it.

    Section 40 provides the engine for the Leveson reform package that was endorsed by all parties in parliament. Pretty well everything else involved, including the royal charter, creates a framework for change; section 40 is the part designed to make it work........." continues.

    Did you miss that yesterday Ros in your haste to hammer the Mccans.

    It is by Christopher Jefferies (I don't remember you ever commenting on the treatment he received in the press).

    Your normal response is that you can't be arsed to look up things and provide evidence but I will do the right thing and give you a link:

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/06/david-cameron-press-intrusion-leveson-promises

    PS - after your disaster interview with the Sun which you say you were misquoted - you should be supporting the Mccanns and everyone who is fighting for this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You sir are most deserving of the implementation of section 40. Your treatment by the press was deplorable and I wish you every success in becoming a channel to continually remind the PM and Parliament of the need to protect the innocent victims of press intrusion and lies.

      However you sir did not pay BP £500k to keep you on the front page, you sir did not encourage the press to hound to death an innocent woman whose only crime was she had an opinion. You sir did not refuse to answer questions put to you by the police in connection with a crime that you were innocent off.

      You sir by aligning yourself with Gerry McCann and his wife who did do all those things have not only disrespected yourself as a innocent person of press wrong doing but you have disrespected many other innocent victims.You talk about the PM horse riding with RB you are horse riding metaphoricall speaking with a couple who have done more damage to the victtims of the press than the Pm and RB could ever do if they rode the grand national with ever newspaper editor in the country.

      Notice Milly Dowlers family doesn't align themselves with McCann

      Delete
    2. @ Anonymous7 April 2016 at 19:37

      you don't agree with Section 40 then?

      I will extend that question to Ros as well?

      Delete
    3. I do indeed sympathise with Mr. Jefferies, he got a very rough deal from the press, unfortunately he was caught up in a scramble for news and unscrupulous newspaper were going way beyond their remit.

      He has my sympathy, but he has been compensated and his name has been cleared, what more does he want? The Press have acknowledged errors were made and hopefully lessons have been learned.

      However, you cannot legislate for every facet of human nature. Every profession has its' rogues - as I said earlier, even doctors.

      In the case of Mr. Jefferies, sometimes things just happen, we are in the wrong place at the wrong time. However, devoting your life to putting right the hurt you experienced during one period of your life is destructive and quite frankly, insane. OK, it was a shocking experience, but is that really what he wants to be remembered for? And he is the one who is keeping it in the news.

      Every story, whether sensational or mundane will be wrapping paper for chips the next day. The stories are only important to the people who feature in them. It takes a real narcissist to believe that they will be the hot topic of conversation forever more.

      The McCanns have actively worked towards keeping themselves in the news, they paid Bell Pottinger 500k to keep them on the front pages for a year! Just a few weeks ago their spokesman Clarence Mitchell was offering exclusives for the forthcoming 10th Anniversary. You must therefore be able to see that Gerry's demands for new press regulations are a tad hypocritical.

      And good heavens no, Gerry is not speaking on behalf of me, I have far more interesting and important things to worry about than some eejit calling me a bitch on the net!

      Delete
  19. Why the general public would support suppression is anyones guess...mind you, if it kept secrets that could put you in the slammer to remain a secret then it sounds lovely :)
    1Matthew1

    ReplyDelete
  20. "Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 April 2016 at 17:39

    Whilst all the usual suspects were there 17:07, myself included, the McCann hashtag had a huge influx of new commentators most of whom were irritated by Gerry's constant demands. For a few hours Gerry's name was trending."

    When will you recognise that you are a member of a hate club?

    You are a member of a pack. You have nothing to contribute as an individual.

    Just like you were in your self admitted pack on AOL.

    You have got everything wrong as unusual.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am not a member of any club, least of all a hate one. I pride myself on having always been an independent, I write for myself not anyone else.

      If you want an example of a pack, take a look at the anonymous pro McCann groups who compiled the dossier that resulted in Brenda Leyland's death.

      The popularity of my blog shows that I clearly do have something to contribute as an individual, so that nasty remark is what it is, just a nasty remark.

      Delete
    2. How anyone who has done any research on the McCanns can believe their story is beyond me. I was originally a supporter of theirs but wondered why some people doubted them. Out of curiosity one day I did my own research and was astounded by what I found - from all different sources btw not just the anti McCanns. There is even some misunderstanding on here, the McCanns have never been cleared, in Portugal once a case has been shelved all Aguidos are removed officially from the list - Portuguest people have always disbelieved their story, which has so many inconsistencies it is amazing they were not carted off to jail on the spot, I also think the British police have a very strong suspicion but are not allowed to act independently. Like many things in this case original statements were changed, the test results did come back as 100% Madeleine and were quickly changed when the implications were realised. I don't know why they are protected but they certainly are.

      As far are as press freedom is concerned, it is appalling the intrusions they carried out, and still do I believe in some cases, and there definitely needs to be some kind of better control, but choosing/allowing anyone from the McCann family to act as a spokesperson is beyond belief. They have so little support left it just takes away from a campaign that does have some merits.

      Delete
    3. Perhaps it is not an accident that the McCann family are being encouraged to be visual in the campaign for press restrictions? And perhaps the press - and most notably Katie Hopkins' - new willingness to be openly critical of the McCanns is connected to this. People have already mentioned that they would not want to support any campaign – however laudable – that the McCanns were involved with, so perhaps it's hardly surprising that we're hearing a lot about Gerry McCann's support for a press clampdown - FROM THE PRESS.
      What a fool he is to bite the hand that has fed himself and his wife for so long.

      Delete
  21. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 April 2016 at 20:04

    so maybe you could give your readers the benefit of your individual input on matters of Section 40 apart from the personal appearance of the Mccanns?

    I have not seen anything yet - you just jumped on the bandwagon and got everything wrong.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know what Section 40 is 20:11, because it doesn't interest me. In my own list of priorities the hurt feelings of those maligned by the press isn't even on the radar.

      I am really sorry that those touched by tragedy were hurt by the rogue reporters, but with the most stringent libel laws in the world, we don't need any more laws.

      Delete
    2. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 April 2016 at 20:55

      The whole point of Gerry's interview and press reports was Section 40 - you wrote a blog about something you didn't know!!!!!

      Delete
    3. I haven't discussed Section 40, because, as I said earlier, it is of no interest to me and it doesn't seem to be of much interest to David Cameron either.

      Delete
    4. Hello Rosalinda/ Bjorn/Linkoping/Sweden again

      Interesting discussions on your blog this time, though I don’t know so much about the Leveson Inquiry, I still cannot understand why Gerry’s opinion on press ethics is taken seriously by anyone. Had the British press been more ”self regulated”, as he wishes, he would definitely not have managed to launch the abduction hypothesis so successfully, besides what would their Madeleine Fund be without the flow of money, that has been pouring into it as the result of all their lawsuits on defamation and of all of their out-of-court settlements.

      Delete
    5. Hi Bjorn, always nice to see you :)

      Gerry and Kate have to keep up their outrage at the press intrusion, because their argument is that they remain under suspicion because of what was said in the press. In their minds, the public would believe them if the press hadn't been so nasty. And of course, it has been extremely lucrative, they have received huge amounts in compensation and hope to receive more, as they pointed at out Leveson, they have only been compensated for the damage done in the UK, not the damage done globally which could run to millions.

      The Leveson Inquiry was a whole new low for the British establishment. The sycophantic fawning of Gerry and Kate by Lord Leveson and the lawyers was like watching an episode of the Twilight Zone where all the professionals had been lobotomized. I actually hope the world is laughing at them, and if it is just laughing, then those members of the establishment so willingly assisting the parents in the cover up of a child's death will have got off very lightly.

      Gerry couldn't care less about ordinary people being hounded by the press, all he cares about is the damage done to his fundraising. When the press were onside, he and his wife were receiving millions in donations, when the press 'turned', the donations stopped.

      Delete
  22. IMPORTANT NOTE FROM ROS:

    Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 April 2016 at 20:17

    If you simply listen to the words to the exclusion of everything else, you are missing about 80% of the message that is being communicated.

    -----------------------------------

    So, as we can't see Ros - what does that make of this blog?

    ReplyDelete
  23. An interesting read for you Ros

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-tees-35977100

    ReplyDelete
  24. There is only one direction that the primary evidence from May 3 onwards can be seen evolving to. That starts with the Pj case and the facts in its files, follows with the flight by the couple from the country they claimed they would never leave without their child (and it was a genuine flight), and is confirmed in spades by the archiving summary which stated correctly that no Portuguese prosecution of the pair could possibly succeed.

    All subsequent evidence in court and the Mccann's own writings has confirmed the inevitable direction of events by its uniquely consistent nature - no evidence of any sort to counter a single line of the devastating archiving summary, no voluntary attempts by any of the 7 to enlarge upon or justify their roles, not a single tit-bit of Grange evidence, as Ros so rightly says, that the parents have been able to release in their own favour.

    Note that the parents themselves do not make the factual claim that they are not suspects in the Grange investigation.

    To accept this evolution no cherry picking is required, no Hall fantasies, no bolt on theories; equally to try and challenge it means cherry picking on an industrial scale - as seen on Twitter and elsewhere. But dissing the dogs, smearing the Pj, laughing at the nutter support on the anti side makes absolutely no difference to the direction and dynamic of the investigation so far: it is there, for ever, in the official case records and the admission by Kate McCann that they would and did lie to prevent the uk public from finding out that they were the chief suspects. It is there in print for ever.

    Lastly I repeat my challenge to all comers to produce evidence that Kate McCann rejected her own lawyer's suggestion to admit to the Pj that she had disposed of her daughter's body. As even Nessling eventually and with bad grace had to admit when he was foolish enough to take on my challenge, Kate McCann in the famous scene with Gerry and Abreu in "Madeleine" NEVER rejected his advice.

    All this makes me quite certain of the direction things are going.

    Lastly, did anyone else notice how obvious the "supportive" comments for the pair have suddenly become this week? Once upon a time some at least we're kosher. Not anymore. Nice one R.






    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ john blacksmith7 April 2016 at 21:17

      what on earth are you saying:

      1. "the flight by the couple from the country they claimed they would never leave without their child "

      That statement was made before they knew that would be made arguidos in a dodgy police investigation.

      2. "All subsequent evidence in court"

      perhaps you would explain what court that was.

      3. "no evidence of any sort to counter a single line of the devastating archiving summary"

      The archiving report said there was no evidence of any crime by any of the arguidos (including Murat)

      4. "Note that the parents themselves do not make the factual claim that they are not suspects in the Grange investigation. "

      They didn't have to - Grange said that themselves.

      5. "Lastly I repeat my challenge to all comers to produce evidence that Kate McCann rejected her own lawyer's suggestion to admit to the Pj that she had disposed of her daughter's body."

      She didn't reject her own lawyer's suggestion to admit .... that is exactly the point of the "she refused to answer questions" argument.

      what on earth are you talking about?

      Delete
  25. Desperate times indeed. Ros and Blacksmith. Two nutters of the tiny McCann internet world.
    Maybe one day you two could actually contribute something to the real world.
    Here's hoping.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree - but will they ever?

      Delete
  26. Does 22.06 have a Liverpool accent by any chance?

    ReplyDelete
  27. Gerry Mccann was advocating support for people like Ros who said she had been misrepresented in the press. How does she react?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wasn't bothered by what the Sun said 22:25, I am secure in the knowledge that I am not 'evil troll' and no-one will have ever have any evidence to prove I am because it doesn't exist. Everything I have written about this case is online and open to scrutiny, there is no trolling.

      I never made a big deal out of it, because for me it wasn't a big deal, the label they put on me couldn't stick because there was nothing for it to stick to. I am a wordsmith, I am more than capable of defending myself without the need for high priced lawyers.

      Delete
    2. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 April 2016 at 22:53

      You should maybe look back at your blogs and various comments at the time.

      You were very bothered by the hundreds of negative comments you received at the time.

      That was just from ONE - one (1) article in the paper about you. An article that you agreed to do.

      Delete
    3. I was distressed at the time by the attacks on me from people I believed were on the same side. However, it was one of those live and learn experiences and I learned rather a lot. Most notably, that a lot of very bad people had attached themselves to this case for very nasty reasons.

      Another knock to my faith in human nature, but all water under the bridge now. Bizarrely, I am even grateful to have had the experience, it was a fast track route to discovering who my friends were! I learned much over that couple of days, and I value what I learned. I needed to toughen up and I needed to be a little more cautious.

      Delete
    4. Err, should add, Gerry McCann is the last person I would want speaking on my behalf.

      Delete
    5. I don't think the British people would vote for 1 man 1 vote at the minute if it was being promoted by Gerry McCann never mind section 40. Do these people think the PM is totally PR niaive. He knows when the people are rightly outraged. The Millie Dowlers case rightly led to levenson but he knows that he is safe in his actions of ignoring the demand for section 40 implementation because it's fronted by McCann.

      Delete
  28. I don't wish to be unkind but "what are you talking about" expostulations invite dismissal. Why would I want to bother with someone who doesn't understand what I've written? Catch up!

    1 They did not decide to flee because they were the victims of a dodgy investigation; there is no evidence whatever that they had any such knowledge so you are making a pure subjective statement of opinion.

    According to the prime sources, which I leave you to discover for yourself some time, Gerry McCann gave his reasons for fleeing across the border and "dodginess" was not one of them?

    Would you like to check the transcripts of the 2009 Lisbon hearing, the judgement of the Portuguese court of appeal and the most recent full libel hearing. I have seen all the transcripts for myself: at no time did any of their witnesses, not even the lawyer MacBride, challenge any of the findings of the archiving summary. If you are unaware of the significance of the summary's description of their failure to co-operate then I suggest you read it, rather than the cherry-picked version that the parents had translated for the English hacks and people like yourself.

    The latest hearings continued the process of McCann witnesses making claims about the summary and having to be corrected by the judge. Try reading them.

    Your point 4 is completely disingenuous and it's hardly worth pointing out that letting the Yard make that statement and announcing themselves that they are not suspects are two very different things, with the latter offering a much greater gain for the pair. They can't do it, though, because, like any challenge to the Leicester deputy chief constable's statement - in yet another court hearing you are unaware of - about the absence of evidence demonstrating non-involvement of the parents there is a tiny possibility that they might be contradicted officially with, ahem, unpredictable possible consequences. Or hasn't that occurred to you?
    I regret to say that your last paragraph reveals an ignorance about the case evidence of a shocking nature, especially when combined with sneering "what on earth are you talking about" comments. It has nothing to do with answering police questions but concerns the crucial meeting between Abreu,his assistant and the McCanns the night before they were made arguido. In Madeleine Km makes the claim that she rejected her lawyer''s (not the pj's) suggestion to admitting involvement in the disposal of her daughter's body with horror etc. And for obvious reasons. But the text, which km is not free to amend or play with because of the presence of the two witnesses is rich in supposed horror and outrage contradicts this completely. I repeat she does not refuse to accept his advice. On the contrary, although km does her inadequate best to disguise it the decision was taken by gm, not her. And the grounds he gave for his decision? Not horror at the terrible suggestion but because he felt the pj didn't have a provable case. These are facts not claims. Try doing some work and enter the all-comers challenge above. You won't succeed because these are facts. Ask Nessling.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ john blacksmith7 April 2016 at 23:05

      perhaps when you can present a coherent argument in English I will discuss this further with you.

      Your response was garbage.

      Delete
    2. I think John Blacksmith did well in understanding your question 23:38 - I didn't. I'm afraid the teacher in me would have given it back to you and told you to do it again.

      And your final line btw, does not give you victory, it simply demonstrates your inability to reply. When people resort to being rude, they have usually lost the argument.

      Delete
    3. John Blacksmith rocks again. I always read what you say more than a couple of times your writing is wonderful and your understanding of all things McCann second to none. I just lol when " what are you talking about" tried to challenge you. People with any intelligence wouldn't

      Delete
  29. Interesting that the same 'annonymous' person is the main supporter of the McCanns throughout this blog, mmmmm wonder who they might be, they are quite badly misinformed about some of the evidence against them that's for certain. I find this quite a lot now, on most 'neutral' blog or newspaper sites, when articles have been produced, the vast majority of people no longer support their story and many have asked for investigations into both the fund and the McCanns. The supporters usually confine most of their comments to making derogatory remarks about those with suspicions rather than actually coming up with any real evidence to the contrary.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is it only in recent months that the public has been perceived to be turning against the McCanns, or does it only seem that way because the press had blocked public comments for so long?

      Delete
    2. Interesting question 09:31, the number of people supporting the McCanns has always been hazy and I think hugely inflated. I remember reading an account from someone who worked on the McCann campaign, and he/she said they were bombarding social media daily.

      I have no doubt that they purchase 'likes', for example the 'likes' on their facebook page hovered around 250k for years, then suddenly leapt to 600k+ following the Crimewatch revelation. And of course the 'likes' and ''shares' given to their own posts are wholly disproportionate.

      Much of the McCanns' success rests on the perception that the public are on their side - in the early days Kate warned there would riots in the streets if they were arrested.

      That of course, was back in the summer of 2007 when they were really feeling the love, but it came to an abrupt end when they were made Arguidos and they have never been able to 'win' it back.

      In the early years when the Fund was overflowing, Team McCann could monitor social media 24/7. They quite literally had an army to seek out and destroy all the parents' critics. These media monitors were proactive in the comments sections of the national newspapers, the notorious 3 Arguidos, the AOL boards and basically anywhere the case of Madeleine was being discussed. Their mission was to disrupt and smear every McCann critic. For many 'antis' it was the reason they dared not reveal their names.

      The Death Dossier was very real, it was online for years, they had over 100 pages on me, and they also had hundreds of pages and pictures of antis they had tracked down via Facebook. They did not hide their intentions, Tigerloaf regularly called on them to write to 'antis', employers, friends, relatives and neighbours, to inform them that their victim was part of a 'Hate Campaign'. The odious Jayelles wrote to my publishers Random House.

      This Blacklist was a warning to all those who spoke out on behalf of Madeleine and ultimately, they used Brenda Leyland as an example of what would happen to all those on their sinister 'List'.

      Everything was of course metaphorically shredded after Brenda's death, the tragedy of course being that Brenda did not live to see how spectacularly their stunt had backfired. The public weren't angry at Brenda, they were horrified at the cruelty of the McCanns and Sky News. The poor woman was publicly executed at their request!

      I'm not really sure the public care very much either way 09:31, there only seems to a few of us diehards left. Gerry and Kate do themselves no favours however, by popping up on our screens regularly, because they keep reminding us, not so much about the little girl that is missing, but about the way in which they are still getting away with it.

      As for comments now being allowed - yes, there does seem to be a turnaround there which is good to see. The removal of the Blacklist may also have proved a factor. For many people, it's mere existence was very intimidating. The ghastly creatures who created the List were invading people's privacy and posting up pictures of their homes and families, with suggestions that they should be publicly named and shamed.

      Happily, v.few of these internet thugs remain, the media monitoring machine no longer seems to have the capacity to destroy everyone. There is barely a squeak out of them these days, they have found a new cause to support in the racist, misogynist Donald Trump. Kinda figures.

      Delete
  30. Cristobel, are you saying that no anti has ever posted up photo's of pro's or threatened them or given out their addresses etc. You live in a very small bubble don't you.

    I have seen it on both sides. There were people not so much now who intimidated one person off twitter because they believed she was one of the nannies, and Brenda Leyland was laughing about this and hoping she was afraid.

    I'm not going to say anymore about Brenda Leyland as the woman had mental problems and joining a crowd as she did on twitter who she probably thought of as friends wasn't the right way in my opinion of gaining friendship and company. Her 'friends' made nasty comments about her themselves before she died.

    There were people on the internet who, threatened and abused the McCann's and their children, posting up what school the children went to and suggesting they kidnap them. Also suggesting they kidnap the McCann's and torture them until the confessed. People saying how they saw Kate in a shop etc.

    So PLEASE don't pretend it was one sided.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree that there are many antis who have behaved appallingly, most notably Tony Bennett trying to cash in with his Madeleine Foundation and crack pot publicity stunts.

      There have been other 'nasties' too, especially at the beginning, but most of the loons who attach themselves to high profile tragedies have long since moved on. As someone who has been in the thick of it for nearly 9 years, I have never seen anyone threatening the twins or even the McCanns. The McCanns cited the 'kidnap threat' in their civil action against Goncalo Amaral, but they were unable to produce evidence of this for the Court.

      The majority of the antis are considerate of the twins, they are concerned for them because they understand how difficult all of this must be.

      I agree with you about Brenda. I witnessed the savagery that was unleashed following the Sky news stunt, and much of it came from the antis. I experienced the same when I did the troll article for the Sun - even the 'pros' felt sorry for me!

      Sadly, this case has attracted the worst of humanity, on both sides, anonymous fanatics who will go to any lengths to bring misery to strangers online. For the trolls, any 'cause' will do, they simply want victims to intimidate, it makes them feel better about themselves.

      Delete
  31. Cristobel, in one of your previous blog posts, you said you would rather have tea with Fred and Rosemary west than the McCann's or similar words.

    You are no different from the trolls who put the heads of Kate and Gerry on the bodies of F&R West making that comment. You are feeding the trolls that is the sort of thing they love.

    You have come to the decision that the McCann's are guilty even though they have not been arrested gone on trial or been convicted of anything. You are hell bent on putting out your views here and twitter, flooding the public with what you think. Why don't you think for a minute, you don't know if the McCann's are guilty of anything or if Madeleine is still alive.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When you think of the gravity of the crime, a small child has died and heaven knows what has happened to her body, then the comparison to the grisly Fred and Rosemary is not far off the mark. There is not an upmarket way of disposing of a child's body, there is nothing nice, respectable or upper middle class about it.

      As to my 'thinking for a minute', I have given this matter a great deal of thought and I would not write in the terms I do if I had even a shadow of a doubt.

      Delete
  32. The supporters usually confine most of their comments to making derogatory remarks about those with suspicions rather than actually coming up with any real evidence to the contrary.

    ------

    Agreed. Anonymous @ 13.09 if it is true that 'people on the internet' threatened and abused the McCanns and their two surviving children, posting up what school they went to and 'suggesting' they kidnap them (or did you mean 'threatening' to kidnap them?) then that is a police matter and should be dealt with by the police. If the McCanns want anonymity for themselves and in particular their surviving children, they should never have courted publicity in the first place. I for one think it is a total outrage that, with all the high level support and protection they undoubtably received, particular in the early stages, and with all the money spent on 'experts' not one single person thought it fit to PROTECT their two young surviving children from publicity. By order of the court I think the twins should have been entirely shielded and protected from any intrusion whatsoever into their private lives. Their parents failed to do this and it seems none of the highly paid 'experts' considered it morally reprehensible for the twins to be paraded in public and splashed all over the media. A total outrage, imo. Just shows to go that money cannot buy any kind of moral compass, compassion or, indeed, common sense.

    By their actions, the McCanns have shown they are lacking in all the qualities above and many more besides. Their failure to take in that they have no public support any more and continue to try to play the victim role and court the media speaks volumes about their characters and their inability to self-reflect on their own actions behaviour and the inevitable consequences of those actions and behaviours. Perhaps denial is one of the few mechanisms left to them not. Maybe it is easier to live with delusion than reality. I suppose one could feel sorry for them but really it is their surviving children who one should be concerned about as they are the innocents in all this. That Gerry McCann should be harping on about press intrusion when he himself allowed his children to be splashed all over the media, on countless occasions, and both he and his wife courted the media, is beyond absurd.

    From the very beginning the twins should have been protected from media exposure. In child protection cases - which this indeed was - children are legally protected from exposure. Why did this not happen in this case? The McCanns even allowed the media to film them returning to their home in Rothley. Thus allowing the whole world to know exactly where they lived. And - hugely unwisely - allowed footage of family life chez McCann to be broadcast to the entire world. Madness, complete madness. So how can Gerry possibly expect anyone to take him seriously when he himself allowed his very own children's private lives to be exposed to the entire world and also to the big bad bogey-man who allegedly stole Madeleine and who might very well have come back and stolen the twins too, for all he knew. By their own actions, the couple have made themselves look ridiculous and they can blame no-one but themselves for the mess they created.

    ReplyDelete
  33. 15.58 The McCann's stopped journalists taking photos of the twins.

    From the beginning the media knew Madeleine had a baby brother and sister and they knew their names, the public knew the McCann's address so how do you think the McCann's could stop people finding out about the twins?

    There is a mad man now threatening to tell the twins school that Madeleine is buried on Murat's property, he somehow found out what school they are going to go to.

    How do you think the McCann's can stop people like that?

    As to the McCann's 'courting' the media as you put it, the only time I ever see them in the news is when they are either putting out appeals, anniversaries of Madeleine disappearance, Madeleine's birthday, the ongoing court case with Amaral and Kate doing charity runs etc. for Missing people. They are hardly 'courting' the medial.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hate to say this, but Kate and Gerry have shamelessly used their children as human shields since the moment they reported Madeleine's disappearance. See pictures of their family day out at the Zoo in the PDL. It wasn't until some tactful person pointed out that splashing the twins' faces all over the newspapers wasn't such a good idea, that they are asked for their faces to be pixilated.

      They have used their children all the way through to fend off criticism of themselves. 'It's about this child', Gerry tells us, pointing to a cherubic picture of Madeleine. 'Maddie's brother and sister want her back', says Kate, 'they talk about her all the time' she adds. Do they really Kate? Do these children not have any interests and lives of their own?

      The worst 'use' of the children, in my opinion, was the claim that the little boy heard Goncalo Amaral's accusations against his parents whilst on a school bus. This of course led to the sensational and frightening tabloid headlines that put the twins directly in the public spotlight. The parents fought Goncalo's request to have the case heard in private for the sake of THEIR children, why would they do that?

      As to your final paragraph, I'm not sure if you are joking in the style of 'what did the Romans ever do for us?'. You have cited all their annual gigs, their appeals, their publicity seeking charity runs and their ongoing court case, as if this were all normal behaviour for the parents of a missing child. It's a if their annual appeal is as established as the Queen's speech on Christmas Day. Actually, scrub that one, it is.

      What you do not seem to appreciate is that all of the above are choices made by the McCanns, no-one is twisting their arms, they are up for anything. If they choose to be in the public eye, there will be critics, and most people in the public eye know this and live with it.

      The McCanns are passing responsibility for their childrens' wellbeing into the hands of the authorities, the media and the behaviour of people online rather than accept that personal responsibility themselves. They are trying to protect their children by taking out all their enemies and they want the strong arm of the law on their side.

      The fact is, they must take responsibility for their children, the protection has to begin in the home. If a small kid asks 'mum is there any such thing as a bogeyman', the answer is 'NO' with lots of hugs and reassurance. The Victorians may have threatened their kids with the bogeyman, but they were never cruel enough to say he was real.

      As parents, Kate and Gerry have a responsibility to protect their children from becoming 'victims'. Being a victim is not a good life choice, it makes you grow up frightened and whiney. They need to tell their children the truth, the real truth, because there is nothing more frightening for a small child than being kept in the dark, and I don't just mean metaphorically. The truth may be scary, but the lies are worse, because the child has 'just enough' information to let their imaginations run wild. They also need to stop using their childrens' names in interviews. They are at an age where they want to blend in with their mates, they don't want to be special and they don't want all the kids in the playground talking about them.

      Delete
  34. Well, perhaps they will try to pin the blame for the mess they are in on some of the 'experts' who helped themselves to the money-pot created by their own daughter's 'abduction'? Maybe try to sue Clarence Mitchell, for instance? Ha! No wonder the pink one has scuttled off to Australia...as far away as possible. I doubt he will be badly missed.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I like reading Ros's blog. I like it because she writes from the heart and accepts that an open heart is so much easier to hurt and abuse compared with the severely closed hearts of most MSM feature writers who make sure they give nothing of themselves to their audience.

    How could it be otherwise when MSM feature writers only sell the words, never give them away for free? Have you ever thought how weird that is? Inventing new opinions every day not because they believe a word of them but because if they don't produce their potato sack of words on time then they'll be looking for another job.
    What a guarantee of deceit and manufactured BS that is!

    The idea that her blog is concerned with hating rather than finding fault with two very controversial people who lost a child but learned to buy shoes in Rome and stay, courtesy of their wretched fund, in the Dom Pedro hotels of this world while issuing demands to the British government according to mood, is the usual nonsensical hyperbole of the pros. Hate? Have you read Guardian comments? Public figures and ordinary people alike are routinely described there as "murderers", yes murderers, because of their political actions, most tories as thieves, most bosses as galley owners. Look at the vile treatment of Milliband by the MSM. The Mccanns have never faced that filth, all of which be it noted was provided by the MSM first, in 2007, people like Jerry Lawton with his psychopathic inventions about the pair.

    Ros's writing is like the smell of fresh air compared with creatures like that or the foul and failed Tony Parsons - but the harridans who attempt to mock her on their tiny abuse -the -antis forums only seem to believe something is true when the Lawsons or the Parsons or the laughable Summers say so. What an irony.

    On a more personal note I hope Ros goes on writing about the case but I have bad news for the anonymous etc. types who appear to believe that antis are wasting years hounding a couple because of their own mad obsessions. That may apply to the inhabitants of the Havern pit bull ring and other minority collectives but as I suggested yesterday the truth is very different: most of us are content to think about the case in a detached manner, get on with our lives and wait for the inevitable denouement to be brought to us by the legal system one way or another. It's quite a relaxed wait, believe me. But not for Kate and Gerry McCann.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Many, many thanks for that John, I wish I could c/p it and keep it handy for a re-read everytime I get the blues!

      Unfortunately, my honesty keeps me poor, lol, I am incapable of keeping my trap shut. When I got my 'big break', my book deal with Random House, the McCanns were at the height of their popularity, criticising them was equivalent to a death wish!

      Ah well, even in retrospect I couldn't and wouldn't have done anything differently. For all the success of Tracy Kandhola, Tony Parsons and even Martin Brunt, I would still rather be me than them. It must be a living hell to be haunted by the faces of those they have betrayed.

      I am hoping that as readers drop their newspapers and turn to the net, writers like you and I who don't recite the dominant ideology, will be the ones they turn to.

      I have been told how successful I could be if I could tone down the politics, etc, but for me it would be like typing with shackles on. At this time in my life, one of my greatest delights is a good night's sleep! I couldn't bear to be tormented by the guilty knowledge that I could have hurt an innocent person with my words.

      I feel no guilt in challenging obvious and malevolent lies. In fact I would go further, my conscious would not rest if I didn't. This case has uncovered the sinister underbelly that lies at the heart of the establishment. It involves government ministers, child protection agencies, national charities and the MSM. The huge dip in sales of daily newspapers over recent years, corresponds directly with the obvious porkies about Madeleine McCann on the front pages and when the public began to realise that the TRUTH is out there.

      Like yourself, I have all the time in the world, though I am actually wincing at the stress those involved must be going through on a daily basis. Why do they continue tormenting themselves in this way? I couldn't live for one day in their shoes, I would go insane.

      Those who say I am adding to their pain really need a wake up call. Someone within their circle needs to say enough is enough. None of them can enjoy inner peace while the lie continues. Only they have the power to relieve that stress, it's within their own hands.

      continues.......

      Delete


    2. The McCanns may see me as the enemy, but I'm not one of those who claim justice is mine. I do feel genuine sympathy, I hate to see anyone or anything broken and suffering. As I have said before, there is no joy in victory, not if you are a humanitarian.

      It is fair to say that I have been detached in an academic way. I have found the whole journey absolutely fascinating. It has been a real learning curve - I am sure it will be the stuff of behavioural textbooks for many years to come.

      For myself it became personal because I blamed the McCanns for my book not becoming the bestseller I had dreamed of. They were the stealers of dreams, the worst crime ever!

      In retrospect, it was my own fault. It was sold as a Misery Memoire at a time when MMs were out of vogue, and it wasn't a Misery Memoire! It broke every rule in the genre because I'm not a miserable person, lol. Ce la vie, I can at least laugh about it.

      I don't really care about the nasty things the McCanns and their minions say about me online. In a conversation with a policeman a few months ago, he asked me how I would feel if I were called a kd. I replied that it wouldn't bother me, and when he asked why, I simply said because I am not one. The conversation went distinctly downhill after that, lol.

      I counter the lies in the best way I can - my words, I hope, show that I am not the monster they portray. Those who allow and encourage this farce to go on, are the cruel ones. I was berated yesterday for saying that Gerry looks wrecked, for attacking his appearance. If those who love him are telling him he looks well, then they are not doing him any favours.

      It is the pretence that is turning their followers away in droves. Their story is without any realism. Apart from all those in the beginning who said 'blimey, I couldn't look and behave like that', thousands more have joined the thong, because their automaton behaviour has become so fascinating.

      But an audience can't empathise with automatons, there is nothing to connect to, nothing we can recognise. They have the perfect marriage, the perfect home, the perfect children, the perfect family. There are no flaws or weaknesses. Kate doesn't wipe the snot pouring from her nose with her sleeve. She dabs prettily at her cheeks with a handkerchief.

      In hiding their weaknesses, they are trapped in a bizarro world where they can never act naturally again. The audience they attracted are still watching them and still waiting for answers.

      I have no problem with Gerry and his wife getting on with their lives, but I do have a problem with him trying to inflict his paranoia onto the rest of us. I have too much respect for the martyrs of the past and indeed present, who gave their lives to get the truth to the masses. I oppose any laws to restrict our freedom of information and speech. Where the internet is concerned, I am still like a child with a new toy. For the first time in history when we say 'but why?', we can actually find the answer.

      Once again, Mr. Blacksmith, thank you again for your very kind words. I'm sure I don't need to tell you, but we artistes are constantly tormented by insecurity. Nothing is ever good enough.

      I once spent the night with a friend trying to guard a very temperamental Russian Icon painter. He was a nice enough chap, in a burly, bearded, raw meat eating, vodka swilling, kind of way. and v. attractive in the sense that everyone wanted to pounce on him. Man, woman or beast, he wasn't having any of it. And it wasn't lack of trying, but apparently the more vodka you poured into him the more maniacal he became.

      Our 'guard' duties failed miserably. During the night he 'escaped' and splashed paint all over the centrepiece of the exhibition he was putting on the next day. The rest of the night was spent trying to get him sober enough to fix it! But I'm waffling, your lovely words have inspired me!

      Delete
    3. God bless Roz eh? The only 'writer' in the world who gives up her work for free.

      Writers usually at least give a cursory glance at their subject matter. Not Roz though. She's brilliant enough to pass comment on a topic she admits knowing nothing about nor has any intention to find out.

      And so say all the Blacksmith/Cristobell appreciation society.

      Delete
    4. Do behave 00:33, for my sins, I have studying the case of missing Madeleine for nearly 9 years! That is why I am able to quickly discern the nonsense from the relevant.

      Whilst I appreciate the helpful snippets I receive and follow up those of interest, I choose my own areas of research rather than those assigned to me by 'helpful' correspondents.

      No doubt you are referring to Section 40 (whatever that might be). May I respectfully point out that whilst it may be of interest to you, it is not of interest to me. I do not for one moment think Gerry McCann is representative of the 'common man' seized upon by a vindictive press in search of sensational stories. Most of the sensational stories were coming from him!

      Most ordinary people know that the freedom of the press is more important than the privacy of the tiny few. And Gerry is one of the tiny few. Those who earn a living by their public personas must take the good with the bad. If they are presenting a false image, the public have a right to know. If a charity is collecting for a cause, then not using the money for that cause, then the public have a right to know.

      Laws to protect these 'charities' are no relevance whatsoever to the 'man in the street'. And if the man in the street were accused of being a murderer, he would say, 'give me a lie detector and I'll prove I'm not'. Lie detectors may be not be 100% accurate, but it would have been much cheaper and more effective than Carter Ruck.

      As for Gerry, he is his own worst enemy. There was no need for example, for him to have given an interview on press restriction. He has been financially compensated many times over and wrists have been slapped. Anyone sane within the Team McCann war rooms would have foreseen the huge, negative backlash.

      Gerry and Kate have always relied on the public to support them and their campaigns. Is attacking freedom of speech really such a good way to go?

      Delete
  36. I see Bennett the Blonk has morphed into gadfly1.3 over on the UK Justice forum. No doubt he'll start chatting to himself soon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He has lost the plot. What a sad excuse for a man and sending FOI requests constantly which costs all of us money we can ill afford.

      Delete
    2. @Anonymous 21.15.

      Gadfly is certainly not Bennett. He's me. Younger, better educated, and better looking. Thank you very much. :) I was also Gadfly 1, and 2. And when this affair is all over, I'll sit down for a beer with anyone to discuss it and what I really know, and think.

      I don't believe in conspiracies. The only thing I believe in is challenging a corrosive narrative that has infected our media, corrupted charitable giving, damaged Anglo-Portuguese relations, and ruined a lot of good people's lives along the way.

      If you'd like a phone conversation to assuage your suspicions, and to cool your paranoia that everyone on the internet is TB, then we can set it up.

      Ros - I hope you let this through. :)

      Delete
    3. So Ros - are you going to block my message (this is Gadfly), and let this misinformation be propagated on your blog?

      Delete
    4. Hello Gadfly, nice to meet you. I'm afraid I don't read the Justice Forum so who is who doesn't really mean very much to me.

      I have no paranoia about Bennett btw, I'm not interested in his and Richard Hall's nonsense, I don't think many people are. They have taken an interesting subject and somehow managed to make it as boring as hell. Bennett's Madeleine Foundation is a dead duck, no-one wants to support him and his attention seeking antics and Richard's films have no popular appeal whatsoever. Understandable as they no more than Bennett's preachy blue ink, no matter how you dress it up.

      You are of course welcome to counter whatever you think is misinformation Gadfly. Kind wishes.

      Delete
  37. I'm surprised Bennett the gadfly Blonk didn't apply for the moderator job over there.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hey - read above. Unless I'm like the main character of Memento and I've gone mad...

      Delete
  38. bennett must think his Christmas has come early this year - a gay Met officer murdered - he hates both.

    And lo and behold - bennett says - "This can easily be sorted. I will ask the Met an FOI Act question as to where this meeting was held, when it started and finished, what the purpose was, and how much the cost of hiring the hotel was."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ETA - he continues to post about this case and yet not one word of sympathy or commiseration for the murdered police officer or his family and friends.

      Delete
  39. He really needs to get out more. Sitting in his study trying to find ways to make money is a bit of a lost cause. IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  40. @ anonymous 16.21: you appear to be as deluded as the McCanns. Are you saying that they did not court the media when they claim that their daughter was abducted? This was AGAINST police advice that it would be the death-knell for Madeleine. Do you think that was responsible? In the early days they put out photos and footage of themselves with their twins who should have been protected. They themselves failed to protect their children from being in the public eye. They reap what they have sowed and now are bleating about the very press that they courted from day one. Hypocrites.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Cristobel, so you would lie to the twins? The McCann's were given advice by professionals on how to answer questions from the twins, why you pretend to know better I really cannot understand.

    As the twins got older they would hear things about the case, the parents can't stop that unless they confine them to the house.

    Yes, it is 'normal' for the McCann's to be in the paper on every anniversary of Madeleine's disappearance her birthday, the court case and the charity runs. As the journalists no doubt seek them out at these times. No doubt the McCann's are keen to have Madeleine still being mentioned in the press, this ensures she is not forgotten. You have to think like the parents of a missing child Cristobel, publicity is the key, ask Kerry Needham.

    As to the twins being shown when they were small, the documentary was showing life after Madeleine went missing, how taking the twins to the farm where Madeleine used to visit is hear breaking for the McCann's as it brings back memories of Madeleine, and if this softens the heart of people like you then great.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes I would like to them! In the same way as I would lie about Santa Clause and the Tooth Fairy. Small children do not need the worry of knowing that a 'monster' (ffs!) could climb through their bedroom window and steal them. What were they thinking!

      As for when they got older, I see lying to them as unforgivable. If you cannot trust your parents, who can you trust?

      As for the anniversaries and opportunities to get Madeleine's name in the press, it sounds like a prison sentence to me. At what point will these parents let their first born daughter go?

      These 1 in a million, or is it billion, chances of finding Madeleine from a campaign poster impacts on all those who have vowed to 'never give up'. If the family is to have any sort of normality, then giving up is their only option. Re-living their pain, year in and year out, is not conducive to healing.

      I am sure rarely a day goes by without parents of the missing, thinking about the loved ones they have lost, but they speak to their loved ones in private and they grieve for their loved ones in private.

      I don't suppose anyone can get over the loss of a child, but one person's loss is no greater than another's. The constant pleas remind us of the special way in which the McCanns have been treated and many are asking, what more do they want?

      Most sinners repent by doing good for the rest of their lives, it salves their conscious and brings genuine joy back into their lives. Nothing makes you feel better than doing something nice for someone else.

      The McCanns could retire gracefully by using the remaining funds to build a hospital wing, a learning centre or set up scholarships for underprivileged children.

      Continuing to use the funds so generously donated to them to pay lawyers, dodgy detectives, spin doctors and media monitors to destroy a good detective is cruel and immoral.

      Imo, the McCanns must tell the children the truth, no matter how hard that might be. The problem with one lie, is that it spawns hundreds more, and the more lies you tell, the more likely it is you will be found it.

      As for the professionals employed by the McCanns? Professionals have a price tag, they will say pretty much anything you want them to. But I am curious now - are there any psychologies (amateur or profession) who think it is a good idea to tell toddlers their sister was stolen in the night?

      Delete
  42. John Blacksmith - 'I would rather have Cocktails with Fred and Rosemary West than that lot' smell of fresh air you say, it stinks from where I'm sitting.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are on very dodgy ground by raising the issue of Fred and Rosemary West again. Do you not understand that killing and disposing of a child is just as heinous when carried out by professionals as it is when carried out by social misfits. There is nothing 'nice' about it.

      Delete
    2. No one is saying it's nice.( you as usual deliberately misinterpreting).

      The West's were a depraved couple who systematically tortured, abused and murdered over a long period of time.

      The Mccann's whilst probably being in someway responsible for their child's disappearance cannot in anyway be compared.

      Courting the press,obstructing police, again guilty but comparable to The West's, never.

      That is why you are thoroughly deserving of the label hater and troll. You will say anything ( much like Hopkins, except she does it better) in order to appear controversial. You are also the most contradictory person I have ever come across. You make snide nasty remarks about the McCann couple then start offering them tea and sympathy in your next outing.

      Take a good hard look in the mirror. Something you have been advised to do many times by many people.

      Delete
    3. Interesting reply 00:45, are you saying Madeleine's disappearance is less murky, more of a white collar crime? The actual mechanics of it were equally as diabolical, whichever way you look at it.

      How do you measure 'evil'? As a society we see evil as the dark, sinister basement of Hannibal Lecter as the personification of evil. Whilst we see the tory benefit snatchers who are killing thousands, as respectable.

      I suppose if you were to measure the 'evil' by the number of people affected, the McCanns have run a global campaign. For myself one of their greatest crimes is their propagation of the idea that our children are in constant danger of being snatched from their beds by predators. It simply isn't true and it is cruel to spread fear. How many family holidays were ruined in the summer of 2007. In the aftermath of Maddie's disappearance as every parent became paranoid about their children's safety and hostile towards strangers, especially swarthy ones.

      How many people have been named and their pictures put on the front pages of our newspapers, declaring them as prime suspects? How many people have been accused? How many lives have been wrecked?

      What of all those people taken in by the 'lie'? All those who gave so generously to the Fund. All those who ran coffee mornings, auctions and grand fundraising events? All those VIPs who were so vocal in their support of Kate and Gerry, and so condemnable of the Portuguese police and Goncalo Amaral? They will forever more have their judgment and reputation called into question and I predict a sea of red faces.

      I don't make snide remarks, I say what I think in vernacular they can understand. I won't pussyfoot around them as you do. They need to know the reality of how the public perceive them, not the manipulated words of sycophants. Those who think they are protecting them, really aren't. They are adding layer upon layer of deception, they are offering happy endings that are non existent.

      One of the more disturbing aspects of this case, is the inability of those within and close to the family, to face up to reality. Arguably those closet, have made Gerry and Kate what they are. People don't suddenly become prolific liars, it is a lifelong journey.

      I always remember a very enlightening blog by Pat Brown in which she explained that trauma does not change a person's personality. Whatever that person was before the trauma, they will be the same after. Gerry and Kate were too important to look after their kids before Maddie disappeared
      and too important to look after them for the remainder of their time in PDL.

      They are not endearing traits 00:45. Gerry's blog and Kate's book are a litany of journeys to and from the airport picking up friends and relatives to look after the kids for the brief times they were allowed out of the crèche. Parents who go off on a European tour while leaving their toddlers in the same place their elder sister was 'taken' from, will raise eyebrows.

      Delete
  43. Blessed are the cracked, for they let in the light.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Cristobel, the McCann's did not tell the twins that a monster climbed through the bedroom window and stole Madeleine, you really do exaggerate and make things up. The twins were told a bad man took Madeleine and they understood that it is wrong to take things that are not yours. Now they understand completely what happened to Madeleine.

    No one can tell the parents of a missing child to give up on them, I couldn't and I can't imagine the McCann's giving up. Until they find out what happened to Madeleine they will never rest.

    It's fine for you sitting there and saying what you think they should do, but you are not in their situation are you.

    ReplyDelete
  45. The mythology of the ''bad man'' dirty, old, spotty, smelly, unkempt This is why children don't understand stranger danger. He \ she doesn't always fit that MO.

    But more interestingly just how do young children know the difference between 'bad man' and monster.

    Why always assume a 'he' the reason Wests & Brady got away with it, was because of a woman

    ReplyDelete
  46. Btw (Gadfly here). I am Anonymous7 April 2016 at 15:11 ...

    You're not going to let me reply to: Anonymous8 April 2016 at 21:15 who is talking out of his arse?

    ReplyDelete
  47. Almost all the pro-McCann comments above demonstrate the shocking loss of energy and conviction that has left all of them resembling bled corpses on a slab.

    There is no contact at all anymore with facts because I, as I've said many times, no facts are available to challenge the known outlines of the Portuguese investigation. All we ever get is rudeness and emotive assertion on the most juvenile level. Look at 12.59: the poster asserts as fact that he/she knows what the McCann told the twins. The poster does not know and has no way of knowing. The assertion is then made that the children "understand completely" what has happened to M. Again, there is no way for the poster to know this as fact: it is pure opinion. The assertion is then made that they will never rest until they find out what has happened to M. Again this is not a statement of fact but of emotional belief, otherwise known as wind.

    That is why I repeat what I wrote about the inevitable outcome of this affair: the supporters have finally been starved to death by loss of truthful nutrition from investigative sources. No cause can survive such a loss and these current, pathetic appeals to belief rather than fact are a rather horrible illustration of a fantasy that is rotting away before our eyes like a gangrened limb. Keep watching.

    ReplyDelete
  48. To the person who keeps moaning on - get over it, the McCanns invited everyone into their lives, even to the extent of sharing the status of their sex life *vomit* - so much for being 'victims of press intrusion'!

    It was all summed up by the Portuguese Appeal Court judges in 2010: "upon placing the case in the public square and giving it worldwide notoriety, the applicants opened all doors to all opinions, even those that are adversarial to them".

    Perhaps if the McCanns had pondered those words, instead of wasting more money trying unsuccessfully to overthrow the judgment, and instead of carrying on doing the same thing and expecting different results, they would now have a better standing in the eyes of the public.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Re John Blacksmith at 14.23

      With all your wonderful knowledge, how about giving us your opinion of the timeline with regard to the death of Madeline, hiding of her body from hotel search and then disposing of the body? Because I haven't heard one version from the anti-McCanns which actually might make any sense.

      Delete
    2. I shall ignore your rude and leaden attempt at irony. With the usual reminder that this is Ros's page, not mine, and that I normally comment here primarily to express my appreciation of her pieces, I wonder which timeline you are talking about.

      Can I remind you in the nicest possible way that there is no, repeat, no established timeline for the events of that evening and night. And can I remind you why, not as a matter of my opinion, which is of no more value than any other layperson's, but as a finding of fact by the Portuguese attorney general's department?

      That department's final despatch stated that the police had been unable to establish the course of events (I.e "timeline" in newspaper jargon) involving two of the arguidos and their seven friends due to irreconcilable contradictions in their accounts; contradictions which the group refused to give any assistance in clarifying, despite the fact that the joint spokesman for all nine had insisted publicly that the group would "of course" return to assist if required.

      So the legal situation as of today remains exactly as it was in early 2008: type of crime unknown, no established timeline due to the refusal of co-operation in creating one by the nine at the heart of the matter once safely back in the UK.

      It maddens the unfortunate experts of the cess pit and Twitter that I do not exclude the possibility of abduction, which is one reason why I spend my spare cash on luxuries while Mr Bennett pays his to Carter Ruck. But I mean it - I accept the possibility without a problem. The investigative findings however - which is all we have to go on - have failed to provide any information to turn this into a probability. The official verdict from the AG is not abduction but "type of crime unknown". That is all I have to go on except media junk.

      Now. Comment 8.10.

      I am surprised I made you laugh considering the seriousness of the subject matter.

      I stated a commonplace fact of law and information science: a fact cannot be established by means of hearsay alone. I repeat you had no basis for your claims to know what the pair have told their twins since you were not present nor in their confidence and without a priori evidence of their truthfulness. You don't know and you are simply deceiving yourself by believing you do.

      I hope your claim that I am a hypocrite brought you whatever satisfaction you were after.



      Delete
  49. John Blacksmith, you really make me laugh with your post 14.23, I was quoting what the McCann's themselves have said in public about the twins and their endeavour to never give up on their search for Madeleine. You on the other hand quote 'opinion' all the time, and you are very rude at times too.

    You say Cristobel's post is like fresh air, when all she does is give her 'opinion' such as saying the McCann's have a dark secret etc etc that she thinks the McCann's are guilty is quite obvious.

    So, stop being a hypocrite.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 08:10 You remind me of the dopey Ultima Thule (sp) from CMoMM, who once said my writing was simply 'typing' - without skill and anyone could do it. I actually took it as a compliment, 'experts' make what they do appear 'simple', therein lies the skill.

      John Blacksmith is a fellow scribe, he understands the blood, sweat, tears and work required to reach that level of skill. Just as a snooker player will spend 14 hours a day perfecting their shots, a writer writes always. How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Practice, practice, practice.

      The biggest problem the McCanns have is their distinct lack of persuasive writers on their side. Even the paid professionals have done nothing to convince the public the parents are not involved and they are now seen as the sell outs they are. If Gerry and Kate had had a talented wordsmith acting on their behalf, it could have saved them millions. As it is they have had to rely on aggression and threats to silence their opponents, and of course that can only be sustained as long as the pay cheques keep coming.

      Delete
  50. Cristobel, now, now saying I remind you of someone you call 'dopey' is bordering on being abusive to me.

    Please tell me what having the ability to write, being a wordsmith or a 'scribe' which you call John Blacksmith [lol] has to do with anything? JB said I was stating my opinion in my post when in fact I was quoting the McCann's. JB thrusts his opinion to all when he writes his blog, and so do you.

    The McCann's don't need a wordsmith, they just need people to read the files, read the truth and stop spreading lies and misinformation about them.

    ReplyDelete
  51. @13:35

    "The McCann's don't need a wordsmith, they just need people to read the files, read the truth and stop spreading lies and misinformation about them....

    As they're already over-resourced in that department.

    ReplyDelete
  52. I think I was being kind, you don't seem to understand the power of the written word - the McCanns do, hence the pathetic attempt of Summers and Swan to turn public opinion around. The pen is mightier than the sword and Gerry and Kate don't have a pen.

    ReplyDelete
  53. How can the twins ever have a normal childhood when Kate and Gerry are encouraging them to obtain money from their school friends to bolster their Find Madeleine Fund?

    Why does the school or Education Authority allow this?

    Are the twins school mates shamed or bullied into giving?

    Do their fellow school mates have to give weekly/monthly?

    Does any parent ask where any of this money is going?

    Does nobody ask the twins why they need to collect money when the tax payer is funding the search?

    Does nobody in Leics Social Services think it is wrong that the McCanns are manipulating their children and other pupils at that school.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Heaven knows JJ. Surely among the large clans who so quickly rushed out to PDL, there is at least one responsible adult? So many of them were willing to speak on Kate and Gerry's behalf when the Fund was getting 50m hits, where are they now?

      It's like watching a car crash in slow motion, Gerry and Kate are on a path to destruction, and all their mates are telling them they are doing well! At what point will someone, anyone, have a quiet word?

      I am actually beginning to feel very uncomfortable with the situation. There appears to be no sign of sanity from the McCann camp, and this waiting game is so excruciating, it borders on cruelty. Perhaps if the Panama Papers blow out of control there might be a development.

      Delete
    2. What a good post Ros.

      Could I use your pages to put out an appeal for volunteer pro posters to head over here to strengthen what has been a truly abysmal performance by our anonymous (naturally) McCann battlers, the residue of what was once a self-confident and numerous tribe? They badly need reinforcements.

      Delete
    3. There doesn't appear to be any takers John, no surprises there.

      Unfortunately for Gerry and Kate, their authoritative style of getting their message out there is not appealing. They have distanced themselves from their supporters by speaking to them only through spokesmen and the OFM Webmaster as if they are too important to communicate directly with the ordinary people who follow them.

      As for those remaining on JATKY2 and STMs are reduced to putting up applauding smilies, laughing smilies and popcorn eating smilies. The few words they had have run out.

      I must admit there would be certain gratification is seeing these creatures unmasked. Tigerloaf I believe, harbours secret dreams of writing speeches for Hitler and Donald Trump. Unfortunately without the visuals of the little black tash and the bad comb-over, his work doesn't even have comedy appeal. I get a weird kick out of reading about myself, but even if with all the red ink and SHOUTING, I drifted off!

      And what of the snidey Jayelles? The self appointed vigilante who believed it was her public duty to collect information on those who refused to believe the McCanns. I remember how quickly she reported me to Jim Gamble for saying something derogatory about Ernie Allen, and how quickly he pounced on me with an afternoon of threats. The cowardly Jayelles has had a prolific career online, starting with the Jonbenet case.

      The odious Sykes owns a website that shamelessly plagiarises the work of others to get hits, his sole contribution being the occasional, and not very original, snidey remark. He has been stealing my work for years, he is the lowest of the low. IIRC, he is the one who once accused me of making 'snuff' movies. I had to laugh at that one, I can't even watch Jurassic Park without a cushion handy to cover my eyes at the gory bits!

      I'm not sure BB1 is, Bren Ryan perhaps? One of the more notorious antis, who 'saw the light' and became one of the McCanns more ferocious defenders? Then there Lily, Lamplighter and Pedro who hasn't learned a word of English in 9 years, ALL claim to be 'Slayer of scums' (sic). Bunch of scaredy cats imo and serious misuse of the word 'slayer'. The Saturday morning pictures method of booing, hissing and chucking popcorn, is something most of us grew out of when we found the joys of the back row. Those relying on the bullying attack methods they used at the age of 8, are severely emotionally impaired and never likely to be taken seriously in the adult world. They are embarrassing, which is no doubt why they are so paranoid about being unveiled.

      Continues.........

      Delete
    4. It is bizarre that there is no-one among the entourage, or on the pay roll, capable of writing anything that will win over public sympathy. In fact anyone new to the mystery of this case, only has to look at the pure venom that emits from those supporting the McCanns on social media to see that there is something very wrong with the abduction story.

      As you know John, I am quite happy to publish alternate points of view, I love debate, and bizarrely perhaps, but I have no problem with being proved wrong. I often am, but I have learned much over the years by listening to others and I still have much left to learn!

      Unfortunately for the McCanns, few if any, of their supporters are able to keep a civil tongue in their heads, and I find that a bit sad. I have asked many times for the supporters to convince me, to give me something tangible to believe.

      I sincerely hope the family and friends are standing by them and accepting responsibility for their own actions. None of this would have been possible without all the support they had.

      Delete
  54. It's nine years on and you are still saying the McCanns are in trouble.
    Get a life springs to mind.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Nine years have passed and you still think the situation is excruciating?
    Put yourself in the McCanns shoes.

    ReplyDelete
  56. JJ have you ever wondered if the school itself might have suggested it?

    It's no different from say a child collecting for a sibling who has a problem either mentally or physically.

    You sound quite crazy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. 11 April 08:30

      Why would any school suggest that a young child collect money from their school friends when a minute on the internet would tell you about the Find Madeleine private fund and that the Macs have at this time at least £750,000 given by the public in their bank account.

      Of course there is no need of collecting any search money at the moment as the British taxpayer has given over £12 million to fund the search for M and has just given another 90K to the police for the search to continue.

      Surely the Head of the school would question what the money was for and if there was a more worthy cause than school kids paying the Macs legal bills

      How many children over the years have given their pocket money, OAPs their pension and caring people their cash to fund the Macs lifestyle and legal bills and now K&G are indoctrinating the next generation in "charity" scamming and you think I'm crazy!


      Delete
    2. @ JJ

      who are "the Macs"?

      and:

      "How can the twins ever have a normal childhood when Kate and Gerry are encouraging them to obtain money from their school friends to bolster their Find Madeleine Fund?"

      Where does that come from?

      Delete
    3. you would not think the school or education authority would allow these kind of donations from children attending school to protect them se

      Delete
    4. That is why I get so cross sometimes 00:08, it is as if no-one is protecting those kids. I could not believe my ears when Kate said they twins fundraise at school. It is bad enough that the parents are feeding them the 'search' lie, without actively involving them in it. They are here, they are real, they deserve their own lives. If I were the grandmother I would storm in the house. tear down the shrines and tell the parents to get their priorities in order.

      Delete
    5. a lot of these charities can be dodgy these days as well it would seem good idea for schools to educate the young to check them out as part of their education.i would be complaining if my children went to that school im affraid as fund does not do what it initially stated it would do and spends to little on actual search to much litigation as well imo se

      Delete
  57. I was putting myself in the McCanns shoes 22:34, I don't believe for one minute that Kate and Gerry are happy with the situation. What you seem to forget is that the McCanns are the authors of their own misfortune, they are the ones who will never give up. They are the ones insisting Madeleine is alive and they are the ones seeking publicity.

    Just as they don't accept they were responsible for the childrens' safety, they don't accept responsibility for their actions - it's always someone else's fault. It is not an endearing personality trait, and has a lot more to do with their loss of popularity than anything said by Goncalo Amaral.

    They continue to demand that someone else fix their lives, the public, the media, the government, the lawyers, the police, anyone but themselves. If only person A did this, or person B did that, everything would be OK, right?

    Wrong, because Kate and Gerry have been given everything they have asked for, apart from a clampdown on the press, yet still their lives are excruciating.

    ReplyDelete
  58. The McCanns haven't been seen for ages so where do you get they demand someone else to fix their lives?
    Their lives are excruciating because they have lost their child.
    What's the matter with you?

    ReplyDelete
  59. Just a few days ago Gerry was demanding that David Cameron fix the press. Do Gerry and Kate believe that their problems will all disappear if the press are gagged?

    Yes they have lost a child, but they are far from alone, many people have but they have learned ways to cope with it, without the need to involve the public in every anniversary. The anniversaries are maudlin, and some cynics might say they are using them as a marketing ploy to raise money for their continued 'search'. However, as the search doesn't actually involve any searching, the funds go on lawyers, media manipulation and reputation management.

    ReplyDelete
  60. There is something deeply disturbing about bennett and his gang of "researchers" analysing and passing comment on photos of a missing girl.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's truly baffling why the owner of that site hasn't been sued yet.

      Delete
    2. Probably the same reason why the McCanns haven't been charged with anything yet - the powers-that-be just can't be arsed.

      Delete
  61. Further to this, don't they analyse ABSOLUTE WAFFLE too.

    Photos, weather, creche sheets. Ignore the stuff that matters, eh?

    Cadaver alerts in 5A, Cadaver alerts in the garden of 5A, the Smith sighting, the 'timeline', Cadaver alerts in the Renault, the accounts of the Fund, Tannerman OUT definitively.

    No attempt at all to keep a focus on the points that matter. No attempt to look adult or even slightly hinged on #McCann (even when the Met and the press are now using/quoting it). No attempt not to fall in to Gerry's strategy, according to some, of showing the British middle class that Kate and his goodself are the victims of an orchestrated Troll-mob on line, rather than the reality: they orchestrate some of it.

    My last question is how the hell did he get into LSE? He must have had some talent one day. It's a shame that talent is used today as a false prophet whipping up the dimmer sceptics among us. He and Gerry are made for each other.

    Thanks,
    Gadfly

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Gadfly 19:49

      you should ask blonk he will know.

      Delete
  62. 19.49 Who he, LSE?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm curious too 21:28. LSE - London School of Economics? and yes, who he?

      Delete
  63. To the person attaching my name to the comment on the Wests: please do not libel me, you ignorant little troll.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wasn't libelling you, I was showing you what a disgusting comment Cristobel made on one of her blogs, the blogs you call a 'breath of fresh air'. It is you who is ignorant as you failed to see what I was pointing out.

      Delete
    2. @ Anonymous13 April 2016 at 21:10

      I understood what you posted as did everyone else - apart from Antony.

      Delete
  64. @ john blacksmith

    Why do you come here to challenge Mccann supporters when you have your own blog which as far as I can see, has never accepted comments?

    @ Ros

    Didn't you effectively tell not textusa to sod off to his own blog when he commented on here?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I did indeed tell not textusa to sod off. I avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are vexatious to the spirit. On top of which he had the most appalling bad manners, and I'm too old and grumpy to tolerate bad manners from anyone.

      I actually feel mightily privileged to have John Blacksmith comment on my blog. I have been a fan and a follower of John's since the beginning. He has often been the one sane voice among all the insanity! While the eejits in CMoMM had their magnifying glasses on the kids pictures (ffs), John opened new doors of perception for us by looking at the bigger picture. Meanwhile,those who focused on the minutiae continued to lose the plot.

      I would query not textusa's motive tbh. His blog exists solely to discredit Textusa. I'm not defending Textusa btw, I find her theories a load of nonsense and more than a little peculiar. But to create a blog solely to malign another person (anonymously) is quite a malevolent thing to do, and imo, borders on psychotic.

      Delete
    2. @ Ros - you do realise that your beloved John is actually Antony Sharples - just pointing it out because I know you hate people that don't post in their own name.

      PS - this information is readily available on the internet and is no secret.

      Delete
  65. Ros - I noticed that you tweeted "I've never read the report as clearance Dolly, there's nothing to clear them."

    Did you never read the archiving report that said:

    "The archiving of the Process concerning Arguidos Gerald Patrick McCann and Kate Marie Healy, because there are no indications of the practise of any crime under the dispositions of article 277 number 1 of the Penal Process Code."

    ReplyDelete
  66. hey Gadfly - great to see your contribution to Justice forum - bumping threads from 2014 and adding nothing must be a record in the examination of the Mccann case - you are to be admired for your complete ineptitude.

    To Ros - this is posted under the explanation that you like and welcome alternative views category.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Most of my contributors can distinguish between putting across an alternate view or simply being downright rude.

      Why the aggression? Do you feel better for having got that off your chest? You failed to mention a single point of Gadfly's that you object to - at the moment, you are the one who is coming across as inept.

      Delete
    2. Thanks Anonymous @ 21.35. I appreciate you taking time out of your life to analyse my work.

      Glad to see you think forum chatter can achieve anything of note to further the investigation. I'll re-examine my attitude and immediately throw myself into... oh wait, there is SY and the PJ, alongside the CPS and the Portuguese prosecutors who do that for a living, with real powers. But f(ck it, I'll get on to proving a real photo is fake immediately...

      If you'd like to know my motivation -- in the spirit of being open -- I just enjoy bringing a little focus to a few things that actually matter rather than watching idly by as anti-Semites on twitter "Israel Bombs Babies", financiers of the McCanns such as Bennett, and intellectual titans such as ShiningInLuz collectively promote conspiracy, make the McCanns look reasonable by comparison, and make it their full-time job to have their little followers analyse the weather and charity collectors' scams.

      Thanks, Gadfly.

      Delete
  67. Ros has tweeted: "100% cleared why not announce on front pages and Sky?"

    "Madeleine McCann: Kate and Gerry cleared of 'arguido' status by Portuguese police" Telegraph

    "Madeleine McCann's parents officially cleared as police shelve investigation" Mirror

    "McCanns and Murat formally cleared in case of missing Madeleine" Guardian

    etc etc - a simple search

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. None of those headlines come from an official source and of course you have omitted the dates. The final report was quite clear btw, the McCanns lost the chance to prove their innocence. They were not cleared. Leicester police would not release their files to the McCanns, because there is no evidence that one or both of them were not involved.

      What you are saying is not only a misinterpretation of the final report by the Portuguese AG, it is a downright lie!

      Neither the McCanns, nor all the private investigators, the Portuguese Police and now it appears the British police, have been able to produce one bit of evidence that clears the McCanns.

      Delete
    2. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton13 April 2016 at 23:10

      how strange that you didn't publish my post that quoted from the archiving report!!!!

      You can twist it any way that you want - but it is there in black and white.

      Delete
    3. Apologies, I found your earlier post in my spam box - I didn't put it btw, it must have gone automatically. In any event, I hope it has now appeared.

      Delete
  68. Regarding the bennett the blonk petition

    the amazing astute poster verdi has said today:

    "A long way to go I fear - sadly I don't think it will reach the required target. Would it help if we shout?"

    Maybe someone should alert this idiot that bennett has been shouting and posting all over the internet for months - result - zero.

    But we all look forward to his photo delivering his petition to the Number 10 rubbish bin.

    ReplyDelete
  69. What I find stomach churning is the cesspit endlessly analysing photographs of little children. Truly revolting. IMO.

    ReplyDelete
  70. Ros - don't you understand that Mccann supporters will not post on here whilst you filter out any comments that don't suit you.

    Maybe Antony should realise that too.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I only filter out those are abusive 23:49, valid points are welcome.

      I should add that I have just noticed my spam box seems to be capturing some posts before I see them - I will check it more often!

      Delete
  71. To the person claiming the archive report clears the Mccanns may I suggest that you seek urgent medical help(not from Kate or Gerry)

    You may not realise it but you have a problem in distinguishing reality
    You claim it is there in black and white so you also have a colour blindness problem.

    There is absolutely nothing in the archive report clearing the Mccanns
    If you are already on prescription drugs perhaps you should see your doctor to alter your dosage and if its the other sort just stop, its doing nothing for your mental faculties!

    ReplyDelete