MCCANNS ANNIVERSARY INTERVIEW WITH FIONA BRUCE - UPDATE

 

UPDATE  FAKE NEWS 02/05/17 - THE WOMAN IN PURPLE

Once again, The Sun wades in with another 'McCanns are Innocent Gettit!' article courtesy of Lauren Freun, who appears to know nothing about this case, writing copy for people who know even less 

The Woman in Purple is well known in the McCann cannon and generally thought to be Jane Tanner.  She is mentioned in the statements of both Jenny Murat and Jez Wilkins.  Many think she was acting as a lookout. There is no mention of a uniform (watch out PDL nannies - you're next), but Ms. Freun has, with the assistance of forensic psychologist Mike Berry evolved this 10 year old sighting (and new lead for Scotland Yard) into a predatory woman who disguises herself as a nurse/nanny in order to steal or sexually abuse small children.  The socially inferior, nurses, nannies, etc, are invisible to regular people Mike Berry informs us, to explain the fact that SHE has not had a mention in ten years.  Charming. 

I have just watched the Mark Rowley's interview/statement, and I have to say I am feeling almost as deflated as Bjorn.   Mark Rowley is a difficult one for my mentalist (lol) abilities.  He is of course everything you would expect from a high ranking police officer, confident, no nonsense, and authoritative.  Senior police officers are devoid of character and personality, they can't throw in the odd gag here and there or wear a jaunty hat. 

He says leadS and lineS - the 's' on the end makes all the difference.  And they are not new ones.  He also kindly explains to those of us rolling on the floor laughing at the 'burglars' theory, that it is actually quite sensible and we need to cut it out.  His eagerness to stress the world 'abduction' troubles me.  '......she didn't go off to start a new life' (bizarre).  If she died in the apartment, the word 'abduction' isn't applicable.  

The word abduction however, is a valuable commodity.  It increases police funding and has led to all sorts of crisis management and PR industries.  The idea that victims of crime and suspects, should launch publicity campaigns is, perhaps, the new way forward.  Keeping the abduction theory (and Madeleine) alive may still have a lot of mileage left, which is why this interview left me somewhat chilled.   

Anyway, in case Ziggy and his equally dim sidekicks fail to pick out the key statements, (and they already have), let me assist.  'There is no definitive evidence' - repeated several times by MR and almost as good as Gerry's 'nooooo evidence' which really does need replacing.  In a nutshell, Madeleine could be alive and he rules the parents out.  'All that was dealt with by the original investigation and no need to re-open'.  And 'the McCanns are parents of a missing girl'. 'The evidence gathered by the original investigation is concluded' - they are not going over it.   Actually, scrap that one, because they are obviously not challenging it either. 

Each statement however, probably deliberately, is open to several interpretations.  Given that the parents blame the Portuguese police for their botched investigation, MR has just effectively said, 'it was OK, nothing to challenge there'.  As we know, that original investigation included the findings of the dogs, all the original statements and the naming of Robert Murat and Gerry McCann as the only Arguidos.  MR has stated that there is no reason to go over the original investigation.  At this point I would imagine, the McCanns would like to hear there is EVERY reason to go over the original investigation,  because as pointed out recently by the Portuguese Supreme Court, the original investigation did NOT clear them. 

Despite everything Mark Rowley said in this interview, he did not say the PJ got it wrong.   And he needed to, because without making that clear, we can only assume Operation Grange picked up where the interrupted investigation left off.  He did say however, that they had a huge response to their 4 Crimewatch programs, and among the thousands of leads were a few nuggets.  Nugget is a great word, it has all sorts of connotations, but for those who are the subject of those critical leads, I doubt they are good ones. 

I think this case is now heading towards conclusion, but as wizened as I am, I still couldn't say with 100% certainty, that truth will ever be the victor here.  There seems to be an active campaign by the Media to convince the public that the McCanns are innocent,  The stories are too screwball to be anything other than fabrication.  This week we have Nanny McPhee's evil twin prowling the Algarve unseen, a man with BO climbing into bed with little British girls and burglars who forgot what they broke in for.  I'm amazed PDL hasn't been renamed 'The Village of the Damned'.   

Mark Rowley's support for Kate and Gerry I think, was one in the eye to the eejits out there doing their own investigations, and to people like myself who have the affront to question the word of The Sun.  He's too scary a fellow to question whether he is lying or not, I'm guessing not, simply by comparing his confidence to the McCanns' timidity.  But his words are carefully chosen, they are intended to stamp down on speculation, especially from the media, who are publishing Madeleine stories daily

The words of Mark Rowley don't fit my own theory that the McCanns are not co-operating.  Ouch.  But I'm not ready to abandon it yet.  'We are not following that line of enquiry' is not the same as 'we have ruled the parents out' and those are the words Gerry and Kate are longing to hear.  In 6 years, OG have never given any reasons to explain why the parents and the group closest to Madeleine have been ruled out.  Eg. Their statements match, they have passed polygraphs, the findings of the dogs were a grave error.  Any of which could have relieved much of the parents' suffering, and indeed may have assisted them in their claims for damages in Lisbon.

On the face of it, it appears that Scotland Yard have just given Gerry and Kate a huge vote of support, but on closer examination, like everything else in this case, nothing is quite what it seems. 

__________________________________________


 I have just watched Gerry and Kate's 10th Anniversary interview with Fiona Bruce, and it made somewhat uncomfortable viewing.  Had the interviewees been wired up to a lie detector, it would have flown off the scale several times.  But kudos to them, I may not find them likeable, but no-one can question their courage. 

 

As sympathetic as Fiona was, she did not avoid questions about their massive loss in Portugal's highest court, or the one significant lead remaining.  Gerry fluffs his reply, but it becomes clear that he and Kate are not privy to details of the investigation.  Some might say, quite rightly of course, but these are parents who have been living on a knife's edge for 10 years, leaving victims out of the loop seems incredibly cruel.  Imagine for example, the parents of a murdered child having to rely on public announcements from the police for updates, to put this into perspective.

 

These are instances where a lie detector would have peaked btw, but all 3 managed to downplay their significance and focus on the important matters, such as internet trolls.  Gerry was at least honest in acknowledging that the subject matter of Goncalo Amaral's book is no longer relevant.  GA only suggested Madeleine was dead, Scotland Yard dug up PDL. 

 

But this was not a bad interview from Gerry and Kate's perspective.  I think for the first time, we saw moments of real honesty, and for a while there, Kate seemed positively relaxed.  Sheer speculation here, but I imagine they are buoyed by the words of Mark Rowley this week, Gerry was itching to get them in, together with his usual mantras of no evidence and he and his wife are not suspects. 

 

What I picked up on was their eagerness to convince Fiona and the viewers that Madeleine was still alive.  Gerry, like Kate in her annual message, acknowledged that they were not making an appeal, but they still had hope.  They were back on safe ground while talking about children who had been rescued and found.  Gerry had tried and trusted lines on that score, such as, 'the younger the child the more chance of finding them alive', as he casually dismisses the findings of South Yorkshire Police in the case of Ben Needham.  Whatever are you suggesting Gerry?

 

I tend to think Gerry and Kate are odds with Scotland Yard.  Most notably on the alive or dead question.  It brings to mind the words of DCI Redwood, that I found somewhat ridiculous at the time.  It was something along the lines of following two theories, Madeleine is alive, or Madeleine is dead.  I can't find the exact words at the moment, but I feel they are relevant.

 

Gerry and Kate cannot or will not, accept that their daughter is dead.  Ten years on, that is weird, there I've said it.  Not only is it weird for them, but also for Fiona Bruce, the BBC - and everyone else looking forward to increased newspaper etc sales who are sharing the delusions.  'Do you still buy birthday and Christmas presents for Madeleine?', Fiona asks (I'm not  yet sure if Fiona is syrupy sweet or deadly and dangerous) but 'yes of course' Kate replies, as if it is all perfectly normal and not in the least bit creepy. 

 

There is so much news on the Madeleine case at the moment, that I can't comment on every piece of fake stuff, but Nick Pisa of the Sun deserves a special mention.  Goncalo Amaral is not shameless - he has nothing to be shameless about.  He is the Victor of 8 years of legal battles, he has been completely vindicated, his reputation is restored.  He is not disgraced you imbecile, he is the opposite of disgraced - the highest court in the land have ruled in his favour!   As for cashing in the 10th Anniversary, let me remind you Nick Pisa, that it was Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns spokesman who was pitching 10 year exclusives over 6 months ago! 

 

 

 

Ps.  is comic sans easier on the eye?