'If Ros publishes anymore posts from you saying there was blood spatter up the walls............... I will report Ros to every authority I can to have this blog closed down and for Ros to be taken to Court'.
And there we have it folks, another glimpse of Team McCann's heavy handed threats to silence those who don't believe the abduction story.
Though I have come under many attacks from Team McCann over the years, they have not been able to accuse me of inciting hate, or any other legal violation that would land me in the dock. One, because it is not in my nature, and two, I am a published author who knows exactly how a 'legal reading' works. Three, I'm not attention seeking like Bennett, and Four, I'm not stupid.
The problem the poster on the last blog has, is the mention of blood spatter on the walls. Specifically, the use of the word 'blood', which apparently if referred to as an unknown body fluid, gets the McCanns off the hook. The sane among us, can of course see the snowball in hell analogy - as if playing semantics will delete all those images of yellow post-its on the walls, curtains and sofa we have all seen in the police files. It reminds me of an iconic scene in Dallas, when Sue-Ellen catches JR in bed with another woman. 'Do I believe you or my lying eyes' she yells. Quite.
I am an intelligent, educated woman 'Unknown', not only do I stand by my words, I am proud of them - unlike yourself, who hides behind anonymity to issue bullying threats. My blog is not libellous, nor is it a vendetta against the McCanns - I am the only forum that hosts both sides of the argument.
What are you going to get me in the dock for Unknown? Not censoring posts that give an unfavourable image of the McCanns? Is this still a reputation thing, or have you moved onto arguments for the Defence? It wasn't blood M'lud.
*Seinfeld fans will recognise the soup Nazi, No soup for you!
"'If Ros publishes anymore posts from you saying there was blood spatter up the walls............... I will report Ros to every authority I can to have this blog closed down and for Ros to be taken to Court'.
ReplyDeleteAnd there we have it folks, another glimpse of Team McCann's heavy handed threats to silence those who don't believe the abduction story."
------------------------------------
It should be perfectly simple for you Ros - just quote anywhere in the PJ files that were released to the public that there was "blood splatter up the walls"
Just go ahead and do it rather than allowing hate comments that say it.
---------------------------------------------------
"The problem the poster on the last blog has, is the mention of blood spatter on the walls. Specifically, the use of the word 'blood', which apparently if referred to as an unknown body fluid, gets the McCanns off the hook. The sane among us, can of course see the snowball in hell analogy - as if playing semantics will delete all those images of yellow post-its on the walls, curtains and sofa we have all seen in the police files."
You are absolutely stupid Ros and I doubt that you are sane at all.
Proof Ros - Proof.
Otherwise I can say you are a benefit cheat, a liar, and a drunken whore - with impunity.
I feel your pain 20:04, all that anger and hostility, and too cowardly to express it in your own name. That would vex me.
DeleteUnlike the McCanns I don't have or need a 'hate' box, who am I to interpret what hate is? You can't.
Like others Unknown, I cannot erase the markers I saw on the walls in the police files. And neither you, nor the McCanns get to tell me what to think.
Proof Ros. Lol, this a blog you ejit, not sworn witness testimony.
As for your final sentence you can insult me as much as you like, it won't make me like you, or the vile people you represent. I kind of guessed, the full forces of Team McCann were seeking vengeance against me, just as they did with Goncalo Amaral and Brenda Leyland. That is, destroying lives.
I actually feel quite flattered that they see my blog as that much of a threat. Imagine all those alpha males and high priced spin doctors being beaten by a drunken whore?
LOL at .....with impunity, you posted anonymously you feckin chicken liver.
As for all the truly vile, sickening and offensive posts that have once again flooded my inbox, you are spammed. Weird that my mention of alcohol brings out all the grim reapers - my dead mother ffs! Jeez, you bastards are sick.
DeleteYou don't need to erase the markers from the walls, you just need to understand them and why they're there and what they failed to indicate in a lab. Nor did they identify a McCann.Ask the PJ
DeleteHi Unknown4 November 2017 at 20:04
DeleteI quote what you say;
"It should be perfectly simple for you Ros - just quote anywhere in the PJ files that were released to the public that there was "blood splatter up the walls"
What difference does it make what you call the blood residues in question? Small quantities of blood splatter that had gone down in the tiles, or something else?
How can anyone read Martin Grime’s report about his dogs’ findings without becoming suspicious about the McCanns’ involvement in the likely death and disappearance of their daughter? Why wouldn’t we be allowed to discuss any hypothesis using whatever words we find appropriate, based on facts, regarding the Madeleine case.
What’s essential in the discussion about what was found in the McCanns’ apartment is that Eddie, the 'cadaver dog' and Keela, the 'blood-hound’, both clearly - and independently from each other - marked precisely the same location, behind the sofa in the living room. So blood was found as well as scent of death in the McCanns’ apartment.
Further on, the blood residues found are most likely just small remains from a larger quantity of blood (call it blood splattel behind the sofa or whatever you wish), which may have been washed away by the Ocean Club’s cleaners and before that by the McCanns themselves. Yet, 5 markers of the blood residues could be identified, all of which matched Madeleine’s DNA. The McCanns’ even admit, that the blood may have come from Madeleine, though they “assume” that there must be any innocent explanation to it (nose bleeding).
Gerry McCann has said; “I don’t deny the existence of the dogs”, but apparently, just like yourself, he denies their findings. Please read Martin Grime's final report and don't try to boil down the discussion about the McCanns guilt or innocence to a question of semantics.
" unlike yourself, who hides behind anonymity"
ReplyDeleteSimple solution - don't post comments that are anonymous or unknown.
20:09. A simple solution from a simpleton!
DeleteGo away and think about what you said. Take a minute, it will be worth it.
@ Ros - then don't complain you idiot.
DeleteI see you have edited your blog to remove "chicken liver"
"What are you going to get me in the dock for Unknown? Not censoring posts that give an unfavourable image of the McCanns?"
DeleteFor posting lies and libel.
I'm complaining at the threat to shut me down 20:43, and will shout it from the rooftops if necessary.
DeleteOne of the reasons I am still here is because of my passionate belief in freedom of speech, the McCanns offend me as a writer, and as a humanist with their book burning demands.
This is my blog, neither the McCanns or any of their performing chimps will ever have any say whatsoever in the way I run it.
The McCanns and their on the clock lawyers, have read every blog, and gone over every word to find lies and libel 20:44. They have never found any, because your accusation is untrue.
@Unknown at 20:04
ReplyDeleteJust supposing it was Madeleine’s: maybe she tripped over? Had a slight nosebleed?
Kate McCann
It is interesting that you are calling Keela a failure Ros.
ReplyDeleteAm I unknown? Where was that, be specific.
Delete"Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 November 2017 at 20:56
DeleteAm I unknown? Where was that, be specific."
Show me anywhere that Grime or the files show that Keela alerted to the wall.
I think the conversation is going on in your own head Unknown, and doesn't actually involve me.
DeletePlease return when you are lucid.
I am perfectly lucid - just say where Keela alerted to the "blood splatter up the wall".
DeleteYou know - a quote will do.
You lot are so desperate to put words into my mouth, lol.
DeleteFirst with my tweet to Jim Gamble, then the blood spatters, what next, in your dire need for a quote?
I have never claimed to be an expert on blood, cadaver dogs and forensics Unknown, but I am sure when the time comes, experts will be produced on both sides, well one side at least.
Why do you need a quote from me on the dog alerts? Surely with the vast resources available to the McCanns, they can find someone far more qualified?
It is you that allows lies and libel about "blood splatter up the wall".
DeleteI am using facts to disprove that statement.
The simple fact is - there was no "blood splatter up the wall".
If you cannot accept that then you an even bigger fool than many people believe you are and you are just hosting a hate blog.
@Unknown4 November 2017 at 22:38
DeleteHi
There was, as I've tried to say, blood found between the tiles behind the sofa close to the wall.Despite the apartment being cleaned, one dog alerted for blood the other for scent of death, and that's it.
You are arguing like Clarence Mitchell,when he was asked to clarify whether Gerry had had a blue tennis bag said. "Gerry has never had a BLUE tennisbag" he said, which of course implies that he may have had a tennis bag of another colour.
Madeleine's blood not being found on the wall doesn't mean that it wasn't found at all. In fact it was found, so the non-existing "blood splatter up the wall" doesn't change anything as far as forensic evidence are concerned. Try to understand what's essential for the understanding of the Madeleine case.
Unknown4 November 2017 at 22:38
Delete''I am using facts to disprove that statement.
The simple fact is - there was no "blood splatter up the wall".''
Correct.But imagining blood spatter is more dramatic, let's be honest.
Björn5 November 2017 at 16:45
''There was, as I've tried to say, blood found between the tiles behind the sofa close to the wall.''
Exactly.So, no spatter on a wall. Amaral didn't even say there was any.
''Madeleine's blood not being found on the wall doesn't mean that it wasn't found at all''
I believe the poster above you was clarifying that no spatter was to be seen or found on a wall.That's all. Whose blood was identified by the way, once it had been analysed ?
'' so the non-existing "blood splatter up the wall" doesn't change anything as far as forensic evidence are concerned. Try to understand what's essential for the understanding of the Madeleine case.''
Which is what ? The need to ignore that no forensics report categorically identifies Madeleine's blood and DNA ? That the non-existent blood spatter on the wall can be called blood spatter on the wall after all ? That the woofs of dogs can be believed as evidence whereas the words of scientists can't ? Or that the senior detectives of both police forces publicly stating that the parents are not suspects means that they must be guilty ? So, basically, to understand the basics ( as you prefer), we just pick bits out to make our detective novels more readable and ignore anything that disproves the theories we're preferring. I'm not sure any of that is worthwhile.
VT
@ VT/ZSD 5 November 2017 at 19:48
DeleteHi
"Which is what ? The need to ignore that no forensics report categorically identifies Madeleine's blood and DNA ?"
Madeleine's blood was found! All markers matched her DNA. As there were only 4/5 markers, which could be analysed, there's of course a small chance that it was Madeleine's younger sister's (re the Birmingham forensic report) However, the McCanns did neither deny that the blood may have been Madeleine's nor did they question the forensic analysis.
Unfortunately many of the pro-McCanns totally ignore Martin Grime's and his dogs' findings.
Have a nice day VT
When we're talking forensic analysis, microscopic evidence is pretty big. The 'small chance' of it being someone else's then becomes rather big.There is no margin for subjective interpretation in science. Was any other sample of the 'spatter' identified as belonging to a previous tenant ? I believe it was. Wasn't a semen trace on bedclothes later determined to be saliva ? Who did that belong to ?
Delete''However, the McCanns did neither deny that the blood may have been Madeleine's nor did they question the forensic analysis.''
Would anyone dispute it if they had nothing to hide ? No. When presented with the possibility of cadaver scent Km tried to explain it as she couldn't make any sense of how it would be there. The seemingly odd explanation that she may have been carrying it as she'd been in contact with dead people prior to the holiday is the stand out. That's celebrated by antis as it seems so bizarre it just has to be an attempt to divert the police or come up with any lie in desperation.The other way to look at it is that she was accepting ( or not disputing) the supposed findings and trying to make sense of them. That could be viewed as trying to cooperate .The same applies when they were confronted by the possibility of the blood that allegedly belonged to Madeleine.If you haven't harmed someone and you are confronted by these things you try to make sense of them. It makes sense.
''Unfortunately many of the pro-McCanns totally ignore Martin Grime's and his dogs' findings.''
Does that really matter ? At the end of the day, many of the pros ignore evidence or invent it. They claim there's no cover up yet the parents are receiving iron clad protection by people in high places. It doesn't matter what pros or antis make of Martin Grime's findings. It matters what the combined force of the UK and PJ make of them. It's them who had / have the power to use them or lose them.
Have a nice day Bjorn
VT
It will probably be bennett giving you the threats, Ros. That's his sort of style.
ReplyDeleteNot sure who did that but it wouldn't surprise me if it's him, or at least a mindset like his.
DeleteHe has shown his true colours in the past.
If I remember correctly, then this Tony Bennett character has threatened not only Cristobell before, but others as well. Not to mention trying to get other blogs and forums shut down that seeks to find the truth of what happened to Madeleine McCann.
DeleteNo, this is pure McCann. They are going after me in the same way they went after GA, I am not destitute enough.
DeleteWhilst I agree it would be characteristic of Tony Bennett, he's not bothered about the blood spatter - this individual is.
DeleteHe/she is very keen to establish those markers weren't pointing at blood. I suspect it forms part of a prepared defence, and they don't want the public influenced.
Bennett doesn't really want me closed down. I'm pretty sure reading my blog has become part of his daily penance, he may even flog himself and torture his own genitals, who knows.
Bennett is extremely bothered about trying to obfuscate the truth so on the balance of probabilities, then it will be him.
ReplyDeleteDoes he still threaten your friend, Sonia?
No, Bennett is bothered about fame and self enrichment, by any means. He sees himself as the head of the anti movement, the leader of an army, the Christian soldiers. But if you get beyond page 1 of his shite, you will see that the finer details mean very little to him. He's not bothered about blood spatters.
DeleteI don't know if he still threatens Sonia, nothing something we have discussed lately. I'm afraid his biggest fear is becoming manifest, he is irrelevant in this case.
''No, Bennett is bothered about fame and self enrichment, by any means. He sees himself as the head of the anti movement, the leader of an army,''
Deletewhereas you.....
Bennett is not a head of any anti movement. He sold his soul to the McCann team a long time ago and contiously works for them. That much is fairly obvious to anybody.
DeleteFairly obvious huh. Don't tell me, the dogs told you. Or has he made an embedded confession :)
DeleteThis thread, or blog, or whatever we're calling it, is a perfect argument AGAINST internet debates about anything important or sensible. It's already a bickering spiteful playground argument. How can anyone taking part in this kind of thing expect to be taken seriously ?This is the court of what exactly ?
ReplyDeleteI'd say to Ros, just because someone gets silly or nasty(or both), it doesn't mean anything more than somebody online is bored and frustrated. It doesn't mean you have to take it as law, then think there's a 'team mccann' giving this or any other blog or forum attention and importance.
I'd say to anyone, it doesn't matter if it's the old chestnuts of blood( spatter or otherwise), dogs etc. Whatever the standpoint anyone holds, bear in mind that whatever you may believe, the police have had a better view of all of it than you have. If they aren't doing anything about it, that's it until they change their minds.Try admitting you have a view or a suspicion or you just believe something but admit that that's all it is.Nobody as the 'upper hand' if nobody can prove anything. As for threats of libel or slander or the usual rubbish- it's stupid.
"Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 November 2017 at 20:38
ReplyDeleteAs for all the truly vile, sickening and offensive posts that have once again flooded my inbox, you are spammed."
-------------------------------------------------------
And there we have the truth straight from the horses mouth.
"NO FREEDOM OF SPEECH FOR YOU!"
I am not giving you creeps an outlet for your nastiness Unknown. Why would I put words that intended to make me feel bad about myself on my blog? Would you hang, 'you are a cunt' over your front door Unknown?
DeleteYour ignorance is astonishing.
I take threats to close down my blog extremely seriously ZT. It's success is a result of my hard work and my constant nurturing. I'm not going to allow the McCanns to steal it from under me.
ReplyDeleteDon't tell me not to take it seriously 22:28, you patronising twat, I saw what the McCanns did to Goncalo Amaral and Brenda Leyland. At what point, were the McCanns going to tell Brenda not to take it seriously?
'Try admitting', Jeez, you deluded eejit, no-one is holding back, no-one is pretending they don't believe the McCannns in order to win friends and influence people.
''I am an intelligent, educated woman''
ReplyDelete''Don't tell me not to take it seriously 22:28, you patronising twat,I saw what the McCanns did to Goncalo Amaral and Brenda Leyland. At what point, were the McCanns going to tell Brenda not to take it seriously?''
Nothing libelous there then. Such grace.
Great forum you have created Ros.
ReplyDeleteKeep up the good work, it's so informative.
I'm thinking that hurtful comments to you by sick posters could be eliminated.
Which I'm sure you consider every time
You do have your the power - your finger on the trigger - so maybe use it once in a while.
jc
Thank you JC, your kindness is always appreciated, you are a good egg :)
DeleteI don't post most of them 00:56, but on this occasion I thought I would give readers a little insight into the abuse I receive, and the huge efforts the McCanns are putting into closing me down. They have indeed reported me to every agency out there, their goal, misery and fear.
C'est la vie. But I'm not going to close my blog to get them off my backs. Nor am I going to keep their threats and intimidation a secret anymore. Behind the victim masks of Gerry and Kate, there are a gang of unscrupulous thugs silencing people and I think the world should know that.
But you are right JC, and I know that your kind wishes are sincere. I must use 'the power' and just bin the creeps.
Hi Ros I enjoy reading your thoughts and other posters thoughts too, I agree with JC don't let any comments through which are nasty, by the way I didn't interpret post 22:28 the same as you I just thought this person was trying to say ignore any of the nastiness.
ReplyDeleteS
DeleteThank you S, you kindness is appreciated.
I went back to re-read 22:28, it's always possible I was being a tad paranoid, but I got the same message as before.
That is, 'Oops we have been exposed as bullies again, better backtrack'. There were also several posts pointing the finger at Bennett, ie. away from Team McCann. Whilst tis true, I couldn't have a lower opinion of Bennett than I already do, he thinks of me more as a stoner than a drunk ;) In any event, I am going straight to hell - which doesn't in fact bother me, as that will be where the party's at.
Unfortunately when dealing with snidey people, you have to think in a snidey way S.
Whoever fired off the first threat probably did so in rage, thinking I would do as I was told and censor all posts referring to blood spatter. End of.
Unfortunately for them, I recently spent a very pleasant few hours studying the life of Queen Boudica. When I was at school she was Queen Boadicea, but no matter, sadly it was only the name I remembered, not what she actually did. Which is a shame, because in retrospect, she would have been a far better role model for my young teen self than the lovelorn Bronte heroines.
I have got a bit of a thing for female warriors these days, and girl crushes on Wonderwoman and Jennifer Lawrence. Queen B was a real life Wonderwoman, she not only fought alongside men, she led them! Go girlfriend!
Now, whilst I have no desire to lead armies, unless it is to a good hostelry with fine ale and an Irish band, learning about Queen B, was quite inspiring. It was her courage that stayed with me. Her bravery in the face of the mighty Roman Army. Ok, she didn’t think her last battle through too carefully, but her courage should never be forgotten.
There are very few things I am precious about S, but my blog is the result of years of hard work, if I were Michelangelo, my blog would be the statue of David, and the McCanns would be the ones trying to paint Speedos on him. But your advice is sound S, their nastiness has no place here.
Hi Rosalinda
DeleteIf you have the strength to let those who are against you, and who humiliate you for personal reasons, to comment on your blog, so please do so. They're just making fools of themselves. So let us just see who they are behind their masks.
As I've said so many times before, I've always admired your courage and spirit to illuminate the Madeleine case and I hope that you can go on doing so.
''Unfortunately when dealing with snidey people, you have to think in a snidey way S. ''
DeleteYou also have to know that they're snidey people rather than just guess and then rant.
Hi Ros,I don't know what soft ware is used for your blog,but I know of at least one other where you have to enter an e-mail to be able to post,the e-mail is never made public and to stop any one posting false e-mails there is a simple piece of software that allows to check if it is a genuine one.Might be one way to stop the abuse,if they aren't prepared to use that system its win win all around.
ReplyDeleteYour little bit about going to hell I can sympathise with,I've tried to be good all my life,it'll be good taste the dark side.
And here speaks a voice with authority !
ReplyDelete''I can to have this blog closed down and for Ros to be taken to Court'.''
Not too many guesses who this might be. Note the ''I'' not the we
''I can to have this blog closed down and for Ros to be taken to Court'.''
DeleteSpend less time making threats you can't carry out because you're talking rubbish, and more time working on the language. The grammar will do for a start. I'm not picky, but there's a limit.
Anonymous4 November 2017 at 22:37
ReplyDeleteYou don't need to erase the markers from the walls, you just need to understand them and why they're there and what they failed to indicate in a lab. Nor did they identify a McCann.Ask the PJ
- - - - - - - -
Shall we turn the tables on your comment as say -
Did YOU ask the PJ?
And what did they say, did they give you a secret look at their findings, or have your forgotten the Supreme Court statement that "the McCanns have not been proved innocent". Now why would that be?
Anonymous5 November 2017 at 15:33
ReplyDelete''Shall we turn the tables on your comment as say -
Did YOU ask the PJ?''
( cue dramatic music and tension).
''And what did they say, did they give you a secret look at their findings,''
'The PJ files' is the go-to mine of treasure for every online detective who has solved this case but is challenged with regard to evidence.It's had more hits than Google. They should make a book of them. The findings( or lack of) are publicly known( see the PJ files).
''have your forgotten the Supreme Court statement that "the McCanns have not been proved innocent". Now why would that be?''
No idea. I suspect it's down to something being lost in translation.You see, if you're arrested, then charged with an offence and sent to trial, you are STILL innocent.The prosecution then sets about proving that you are not, in fact, innocent, but guilty as charged. Evidence is then shown to a jury and judge to back it up. Then you're usually found guilty and then sentenced.As far as I know, no arrests or charges have even taken place.Not in ten years and the scrutiny of 'the PJ files'. Senior officers from the UK and Portugal have both gone on record to say they(the parents) are not suspects. Now, why would that be ?
VT
" now why would that be" trying to replicate blacksmiths words without any of his charm and intelligence
Delete@ Anonymous5 November 2017 at 19:17
Deletewould that be the same blacksmith who has deleted everything from his blog again?
Well done Ros I think you weathered the storm well there. I think you hit a very raw nerve there with the blood splatter that provoked a a great deal of anger ( from team McCann). If I had a word of advice to them it would be pull back from the brink now. This blog and other blogs that you pour your hatred in will be around for many many years. You can never take back what you have said.. A good many of you don't have any children but I know there are some who post who do.......think of the legacy you are leaving them. Keep up the good work Ros I'm away to study the files in that area again to see what actually it is they fear that led to that avalanche of abuse
ReplyDeleteCheers 19:16, yes, a very raw nerve!
DeleteI suspect the McCanns have invested heavily in the 'no evidence' defence 19:16 - and why wouldn't they, it has worked very well up until now. But they may have to PROVE those were not blood splatters, and if this is a bone of contention, it won't help if the general public have already made up their minds. We have already seen campaigns by Team McCann to diss the dogs, this probably forms part of a campaign to diss the forensics.
Discussing the forensics, like discussing the dogs, brings the trolls out in full force, it always has. Here, it feels as though they are testing out what they are going to say in Court, to see how it goes down.
I will battle on 19:16, when I left the care of the nuns, as a young teen and quite a drama queen, one of my favourite lines was 'you can't hurt me, I've been tortured by experts'. I think I pinched it from Exodus by Leon Uris, but it summed up perfectly how I felt. It returns when I'm under attack.
Those who write such nasty things are strange creatures indeed. I mostly feel pity for them because they clearly lack the communication skills and confidence to 'speak their truth quietly and clearly and listen to others'.
The inability to communicate is at the root of most trolls' behaviour. They cannot get our attention with their intelligence and wit, so they go straight to potty mouth. Mummy probably ignored them when they were toddlers. Lashing out is the only way to get attention.
To be fair, as a writer, I have developed the hind of a rhino, I accept that if I put my name out there strange people will attack me and even develop weird obsessions. But I don't live in fear, as if! lol. They are more to be pitied than feared. I have the freedom to say whatever I want, loud and proud, I don't have to hide. They do.
Disagreeing with something that has no proof isn't trolling.it's disagreeing.
DeleteInteresting - no-one has provided any proof that there were "blood splatters up the wall".
ReplyDelete@VT the old chestnut of lost in translation,the Lawyers for the McCann at the supreme court appeal argued that the book and a TV documentary based on the book would have damaged the honour and good name of any 'innocent person who had been cleared through the shelving of the criminal investigation.'
ReplyDeleteThe SC judges ruled that the shelving did no such thing merely that the public prosecutors hadn't managed to obtain sufficient evidence of the practice of crimes by the appellants.Strange therefore that they should be looking at the ECHR,not for lost in translation I'll bet. The McCanns not being suspects,they are not unique, nor is any one else a suspect.
The 'old chestnut' that is the senior officers of the UK and the PJ both going on record to state that the McCanns are not suspects( ie, cleared as far as the police are concerned)is not a chestnut so easy to try and brush aside.
DeleteThe ECHR is concerning libel, slander and defamation.It has nothing to do with whee Madeleine ended up or who did what with her. It's about a book written by a former detective theorising about what happened to Madeleine, who was responsible for her burial( and possible death-neither which have been proven right as yet) and how and when they did what, and the various methods of hiding and moving her. It's about a book. The police investigating the more important matter of Madeleine's ultimate fate, have said they're happy that neither parent were involved.The court wasn't and isn't involved in any of the investigation.
VT
VT at 20:01
DeleteECHR: Kate and Gerry McCann v. Portugal.
@VT can you provide a cite for just what the McCanns are going to the echr,no one seems to know so if you have knowledge please share,bearing in mind if its so then its McCanns V Portugal.A look at the echr web site will confirm that it is v a state not against any individual.You claimed the verdict was lost in translation,time to come up with an explanation as to why the it could end up at the echr if this were the simple case.
DeleteThe court never said it was involved, the McCann lawyers brought the archiving into it,the SC merely reported on it.Once again no one is a suspect,they do not have the monopoly on that.
I have no knowledge of it and less interest I'm afraid. If it's anything to do with that libel/publishing/bla bla, they / you / anyone can keep it. I'm more interested in things relating directly to the investigation of the missing child or the bizarre and unprecedented interest of so many (financially ) benevolent psychopaths(politicians and PMs).Who knows who they're suing if they are.Maybe it's an attempt at overturning the latest ruling.But, if, as suggested, it's the McCanns V Portugal, then I doubt that would go to the ECHR . Are they really doing this ? Or is it MSM selling papers again, or the internet getting bored ?
DeleteI didn't claim anything was lost in translation. My actual answer was ' i have no idea' but added that as a 'perhaps'. The wording( translated) as I read it, seems to stretch the right to freedom of expression far enough to practically, if not completely, allow anyone to say anything about anyone with no fear of retribution and nowhere for anyone wrongly accused to turn for justice. The case in point allowed the book to be published with a proviso that it wasn't to be taken as fact.This would< i think anyway, allow the parents to challenge the ruling in the ECHR. I know the court never said it was involved( in the actual crime discussed), but it involved itself by passing the comment that the McCanns hadn't been proved innocent.The police were /are satisfied that they're not suspects.
I don't know what the McCanns can sue a country for.I find the idea slightly odd. Portugal V Kate and Gerry i can understand. That's like The Crown Versus Fred Bloggs. It doesn't mean the Queen or Phil will be in attendance, it's what the crown represents- the country. So, if it was Portugal V McCann it would mean they've been collared.But they haven't. We'd have heard. Portugal hasn't hurt or slandered the McCanns. Therefore,i need to see more about this latest 'development'. Who knows, it might be a genuine one for once. But, I think it's just turned up on the ECHR desk with the title McCann V Portugal( Portugal being their crown court) and will contain that ruling and a request that it be overturned.
VT
VT at 23:54
Delete("But, if, as suggested, it's the McCanns V Portugal, then I doubt that would go to the ECHR . Are they really doing this ? Or is it MSM selling papers again, or the internet getting bored ?")
It is Gerry McCann himself.
3 May 2017
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-watch-full-interview-10326286
05:00
Fiona Bruce: One of the police officers in Portugal has been a thorn in your side for many years, he was thrown off the investigation but then he wrote a book, presented a documentary, presenting of you of what happened to Madeleine which implicates you, and you fought it through the courts. At the moment you've lost and he's won, is this the end for you now, are you going to continue to fight him?
Gerry McCann: I think the short answer is we have to because the last judgment I think is terrible. So we will be appealing. We haven't launched that yet, but it will be going to the European courts.
A reasoned response VT,thank you.
DeleteUnless the McCanns have millions hidden away in offshore accounts, I don't see how they can launch an appeal to the ECHR.
DeleteWe still don't know what their final costs were in their failed proceedings in Portugal, but in any event, an appeal to the ECHR won't put them off. They will still have to be paid.
Gerry's statement I think is bravado, he won't give GA the satisfaction of accepting they have been beaten.
"You will only have to bear your own costs (such as lawyers’ fees or expenses relating to research and correspondence)."
Delete"If the Court finds that there has been a violation, it may award you “just satisfaction”, a sum of money in compensation for certain forms of damage. The Court may also require the State concerned to refund the expenses you have incurred in presenting your case.
If the Court finds that there has been no violation, you will not have to pay any additional costs (such as those incurred by the respondent State)"
I think it's a matter of 'play for time'.
What you don't understand Ros is that there are people sent here from the cesspit to post outlandish accusations that are just false. For some unknown reason you post them and then for an even more unknown reason you deicide to defend these posts and not just delete them.
ReplyDeleteYou are entitled to post your opinion about proven facts, as is everyone, you are not allowed to post lies as if they are facts.
Try asking bennett.
Don't come on here telling me what I am allowed to post 19:41, who the feck do you think you are?
DeleteHow do I know what are lies and what are proven facts, what's to say your not lying to me? You seriously expect me to go through the hundreds of posts I receive and verify each one as factual before I publish?
Your draconian batshit crazy censorship failed in Portugal, will fail in Europe, and hasn't got a hope in hell here.
As for your reference to Bennett 19:41. Let's be perfectly clear, I muse, the people who contribute here muse. I don't claim to know what happened, I don't post leaflets through letter boxes in Rothley, I don't organise Petitions, and I wouldn't dream of taking the law into my own hands.
DeleteI also don't stalk the McCanns, their friends, their family or anyone connected to them, nor do I stalk and harass the innocent witnesses who's names were released with the police files. And it goes without saying, that I certainly wouldn't accuse any of them of lying.
I'm nothing like Bennett 19:41, this is a Madeleine discussion group like no other - it is read and contributed to by reasonable intelligent people, and that is immediately apparent to anyone to anyone who 'drops in'. Your claims that this is a hate blog, are not supported by the evidence.
I think it is the mainstream appeal that bothers you the most 19:41. This blog isn't a niche group made up of headcases, like the cesspit and the myths, it is made up of a constant stream of intelligent, reasonable people, who are as intrigued by this case as myself.
I'm not sure why anyone gives this VT/Ziggy idiot the time of day.
ReplyDeleteVT/ziggysawdust/unknown
DeleteThey must think he's wonderful
DeleteAnon( VT) :-)
Anonymous 6 November 2017 at 00:02
Delete“They must think he's wonderful
Anon( VT) :-)”
Yes, they must (as I do).
Milord is a gifted and experienced writer with a wonderful turn of phrase, light and easy style, great sense of humour and sarcasm. Always entertaining. Never obnoxious. A great opponent! (He is, likely, wrong about the McCanns, right on a conspiracy.}
Peace.
T:)
Anonymous 5 November 2017 at 23:46
Delete“VT/ziggysawdust/unknown”
Surely you are not proposing that Master VT is the ‘Unknown’, as in http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/no-freedom-of-speech-for-you.html?showComment=1509910885315#c2727257696663300940 ?
What a dreadful thought, my friend! I would be having nightmares if that were so…
I’m not having nightmares, therefore you are wrong.
Peace.
T:)
Ah, T, that was like a dagger to my heart! I felt the same sense of rage as I did at my 4th birthday party, when MY friend Tom gave my brother a present just as good as mine. I punched my brother in the eye, and ran from the room in floods of tears.
DeleteI should of course, be a tad more mature by now, but no, those feelings are still there, lol. I dispute every word of your praise for VT, though I am not sure it is as a grumpy English teacher, or bratty child.
Loathe as I am to criticise those who 'try', he makes so many basic errors, the teacher in me wants to strike a red line through it!
His 'humour' is way off! He has that same mean, offensive streak as those 70s comedians, that a 21st century audience finds repulsive.
But I cannot be cross with you T, you remain a gentleman and a non-bully, and that is admirable. VT does get a hard time here, but he returns again and again, so kudos to him for that!
Thanks T, for that positive and, quit frankly, accurate critique of my genius ( I hope you didn't read that opening, Ros). It's a refreshing change to see some positive and mature commenting on what I 'muse .Those old school playground snipes get a tad tedious, despite their hilarious content.I raise a glass to your health...
DeleteYour observations are tad harsh, Ros. We could all point out 'basic errors' to one another, of course, if we were desperate to find something to be churlish about.It isn't easy to cope with this kind of format( a blog). I could put a dissertation together and paste it in 4 parts but i have grave doubts about the stamina of your readers who seem to prefer one line of study and one area. If and when I pen my best seller ( ''the truth of why they lie and go on a bit'') I'll deliver a signed copy to anyone with the good taste ( and £17.98) to request one.In the meantime, forgive the shorthand delivery...
''His 'humour' is way off! He has that same mean, offensive streak as those 70s comedians, that a 21st century audience finds repulsive.''
See ? it's that kind of thing nobody likes.It wouldn't be so bad if you were near the truth or could cite examples, but you can't ? Mean, offensive streak ? I won't mention pots or kettles.But I could cite you-could you do the same regarding me ? Who finds me, or what I say, 'repulsive' ? And why ? All I do is challenge popular lines of thought.Yes, it's true that If someone takes a pop, I pop back.I believe they deserve the lesson and they benefit long term.But, I see many rude, unprovoked examples of repulsive and nasty on here, not aimed at me, just posted.Where's your dismay then ?
As a bratty English teacher, or whatever you decide you are, you should realise that there's a strong correlation between intelligence and humour ( or lack of both).
Peace be upon you :-)
VT
http://www.balkaninsight.com/en/article/bulgaria-s-arms-exports-reach-record-high-in-2016-09-12-2017
ReplyDeletehttps://trud.bg/350-diplomatic-flights-carry-weapons-for-terrorists/
@anon 6 Nov. at 12:59
ReplyDeleteHi
Neither of your suggested links are relevant to anything that has with the Madeleine case to do, let alone the discussion about free speech.
?????
Björn at 16:14
DeleteWho knows? Bulgaria seems to be a hot topic at the moment.
As for freedom of speech:
I've just got fired for telling the truth about weapons supplies for #terrorists in #Syria on diplomatic flights
https://twitter.com/dgaytandzhieva/status/900731359769001984
Björn 6 November 2017 at 16:14
DeleteSince you did ask for opinions, Björn …
“@anon 6 Nov. at 12:59
Hi
Neither of your suggested links are relevant to anything that has with the Madeleine case to do, let alone the discussion about free speech.
?????”
Perhaps you would do better writing, and saying, ‘…has to do with the Madeleine case…’ instead of “…has with the Madeleine case to do…”
You might help yourself by looking it up.
Respect.
T
A bit unfair, anonymous at 11.37, to someone whose first language does not appear to be English.
DeleteGrace 7 November 2017 at 12:57
Delete“A bit unfair, anonymous at 11.37, to someone whose first language does not appear to be English.”
With utmost respect.
Dear Grace
It might’ve been unfair indeed had not Björn, recently, invited corrections.
The point I’ve made will be undoubtedly of use to Björn. He has been using that idiom unconventionally time after time, and today I have acknowledged his invitation.
Björn is Swedish. Let’s see if he is unhappy with me.
Of course I very much appreciate you graceful comment, Grace.
Many thanks.
Peace.
T
PS BTW, would one be correct to surmise that you haven’t experienced mastering a foreign language to Björn’s level, Grace?
I was just thinking what a nice explanation, until I got to the sting in the tail. Ouch, on behalf of Grace!
DeleteBjorn, I'm sure won't mind a bit, just as I don't when critics pull me up on my spelling and grammar, lol. Of course, their intentions aren't good, more of a ruler held over the knuckles approach, but it has improved my English no end! I still have blind spots with some words (bleddy Neitzche) but C'est la vie.
Poor Grace was being kind methinks T, not understanding Bjorn's strive for perfection - which, like yourself, I have always admired. And which I should add, has improved so much since he first began posting here, it is hard to remember that English is not in fact, his first language.
For me, he brings to mind that Master of Languages, the Polish Joseph Conrad, who could not only read and write in 7 languages, he could write masterpieces in them! Apparently, mastering another language takes your brain to a higher level? And I get that. It is something on my tick list, that I am determined to do before I pop my clogs. French appeals, because it is so sexy! Also Russian, because it is sexy and scary. Just when I thought my days of having crushes on bad boys were over, I am inexplicably smitten with Vladimir Putin. That he can speak and understand English but chooses not to, is so cool! He also has that KGB walk with his right hand next to his holster at all times, again, sinister and a bit disturbing, but among my current list of turn ons. If I ever go on a dating site again, I’m definitely going to put ‘must be able to do a Russian accent’,
Ah, but linguistics. It is one of those areas of study that scares the bejesus out of me. A veritable rabbit hole, if you take the blue pill. (Or is it the red one?). It is a huge subject T, it took a long time for Roland Barthes to sink in. Noam Chomksy, I admire from afar. I've dabbled, to be sure, but I'm not sure my intellect extends that far. One of my lecturers at Uni told my friends, ‘the problem with Linda, is that she is not as clever as she thinks she is’. I found it hilarious, still do, but on the whole I would have to agree with her. Given a cryptic puzzle for example, after 10 minutes, I would throw it out the window and go back to contemplating the magic of a sunbeam.
Anyway, T, I have no idea how we got to Putin and linguistics, but your presence always inspires me off onto a stream of consciousness for some reason. All good. Bon Soir to you my dear friend.
Roland Barthes was wrong. Just saying.
DeleteVT
Hi Rosalinda, T, Grace and others.
DeleteI forgot to say, that I'm of course (which I've said earlier) pleased to see that people take interest in reading what I've got to say, as well as correcting my English.
"So, I say thank you T for your lyrics, for givin' it to me" ( inspired by abba's lyrics)
Hi Rosalinda (and T may be interested as well)
Deletea little off topic, but as you mentioned Chomsky, I remember having read about his visit to Sweden many years ago.
A young Noam Chomsky visited Stockholm in the 50s. One evening he left his hotel to take a walk around town. He got lost and tried to find a person with whom he could speak English, but couldn’t. Eventually he got back to his hotel, but he’s later described this sense of being lost in a strange foreign country, not being able to communicate with anyone, despite his general knowledge in linguistics. Whatever written information he could find, it was all in Swedish.
Another young Noam Chomsky of today in a similar situation wouldn’t find one single Swede with whom he would not be able to communicate in English. He would have access to written information in English all over the town, in pubs, restaurants, railway stations, undergrounds etc. Our country has gone through such a thorough transformation regarding our relation to the English language and to the Anglo-Saxon culture, though we speak and write a kind of standard English on different levels.
I’d also say that we are about to create linguistic rules of our own, but naturally based on standard English. So the Swedish English may eventually become just another of all the other Englishes in the world with a grammar and a vocabulary of its own. Who knows?
Hallå Björn (15:59), Rosalinda & others,
DeleteI couldn’t agree more. It is a chance to learn. So, please correct me if I’m wrong, the British way.
Did you know that Sweden beats other countries at just about everything?
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/why-sweden-beats-most-other-countries-at-just-about-everything/
As you say Björn, we can always rely on international language. “I let the music speak” (ABBA).
NL (Holland)
Hallå där! NL and others
DeleteIt's a pity that there're so few non-native speakers commenting here on Rosalinda's blog. I've tried to figure out how many commentators there are, who haven't English as their mother tongue, and as far as I understand they are very few, to say the least.
So, as foreigners, you and I NL are in minority together with a few others, who, as it seems, do not comment on regular basis, and whose nationalities I don't know. Some or someone from France seem to pop up now and then, and that's all. Rosalinda and others would certainly appreciate new perspectives and new commentators. After all it’s your opinion that matters the most, but I agree with you in that language correction by native speakers helps a lot to develop your skills.
Hallå där! Björn
DeleteI stand corrected (smiley).
NL
Hi NL and Bjorn. I must say, I truly do appreciate your comments and indeed talents! I love to hear new perspectives Bjorn, and I'm particularly interested in the way the rest of the world views this bizarre case.
DeleteUnfortunately for the UK, while other European countries have embraced enlightenment and multiculturalism, we are being taken back in time by the tories! Greedy bastards like the Trump administration who are piling up billions and letting this once green and pleasant land go to pot.
I am ashamed to say I know very little about the politics of Europe, I fear it is one of those subjects that if I start to delve into, I will be unable to stop!
I am fascinated nonetheless, and very much appreciate the snippets of Sweden that you give us Bjorn. I hadn't realised for example that languages were combining and SwedishEnglish is mindblowing! As is all the other 'Englishs' I didn't know about! I do indeed learn something new every day on here :)
Hallå NL and others
Deletejust one more comment about linguistics ref your link NL about language skills https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/01/why-sweden-beats-most-other-countries-at-just-about-everything
"Swedes speak very good English, and are only beaten to the top by The Netherlands and Denmark"
Not quite so, because I question our closest neighbours' skills,yet I must admit, that they sometimes speak comprehensive English with us, which they do because they think that we don't understand what they are saying in their own language, but of course we do. It's just that we don't listen much.
You may be right Björn. According to the latest EF EPI rankings (November 2017) Sweden surpasses Denmark.
Deletehttp://www.elgazette.com/item/456-netherlands-tops-english-test-charts.html
I suppose our first place refers to reading and listening as we speak Dunglish.
And since Rosalinda brings Trump into the equation, here is a message from the government of Sweden (we were first by the way).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPGk0GQQR8Y
NL
Hi Ros,
ReplyDeleteDiscussion is good
Confusion...not so much !
I wonder whats happened to JB???
Keep up the good work
Soup for you ! ;-)
Kindest Regards
Afan
It isn't the first time he has deleted the blog, or flounced.
Delete0r....
Perhaps he has realised that the handcuffs don't have the McCanns name engraved:)
Anonymous 6 November 2017 at 18:45
Delete“It isn't the first time he has deleted the blog, or flounced.”
It certainly isn’t…
“0r[Or?]...
Perhaps he has realised that the handcuffs don't have the McCanns name engraved:)”
Knowing john, unlikely. Perhaps he’s still at the anvil or already busy engraving?
:)
T
Ah Bless you Afan, always nice to see you, you have no idea how much your kind words lift me :)
DeleteI have 3 levels of depression:
1. I study intensely, my need to know goes right into the beautiful morning period, when the dawn break and the birds start tweeting.
2. I watch episodes of Seinfeld back to back, over and over. Sometimes, The Odd Couple, and sometimes 'Some Like it Hot'.
3. The Tudors. Mostly Jonathan Rhys-Meyers and Henry Cavill. If you put aside all the blood, guts and barbaric cruelty, they had the most charming manners! I especially like the deep bows and nods of respect. The kind of thing you never see on Jeremy Kyle.
Apart from the toe tinging twinkle in King 'Enery's eys, I also love the beautiful costumes and the jewels, they truly mesmerise me! I live near a house that is said to have the home of Anne of Cleves, and I get a real buzz touching the same walls and walking on the same cobbles as those famous names from history.
When 'all this' (vile internet battle) is over, I want to lose myself in my favourite subjects, Maybe even do a Masters. For anyone who follows me on twitter, you may have noted the background to my profile is a the painting by Delacroix of Liberty Leading the People.
I have studied the French Revolution since my early teens, even since I first read the words 'It was the best of times, it was the worst of times', and 'tis a far, far, better thing I do now, than I have ever done before' as said by the divine Dirk Bogarde.
Sadly, I am at 'level 3' of an episode, the only way I can calm my catastrophizing brain is by studying the Anne Boleyn Files (great site btw), though I'm still not sure if she had an extra finger.
I'm sorry for waffling, Afan, though I think perhaps, you won't mind, your kindness and understanding always shines through.
@Anonymous6 November 2017 at 17:21
ReplyDeleteHi
I see what you mean. One always has to pay a price for telling the truth. The Bulgarian journalist Dilyana Gaytandzhiev certainly has.
It also seems as if this rotten state has become an interesting place for the SY, as they are now spending time and money chasing the shadow man or woman who took Madeleine in that country.
A quote from MailOnline "Police are now searching Bulgaria in an attempt to find her ( that is, the woman in purple, whom I suspect is Jane Tanner)and question her
It is understood the woman's husband, who is now DEAD, was a paedophile". Yet, another scapegoat to blame it on?
F
@Bjorn
Delete'' the woman in purple, who i suspect is Jane Tanner''
Why ?
''The woman is believed to have been the wife of a man of a convicted peadophile, who has is now believed to be dead. ''
DeleteHow very 'Murdoch'. The woman.Vague ? Naturally.If the woman has no name, how do they know who she was married to.Or are we looking at Mr and Mrs child traffickers. I expected a deathbed confession. I still do. I've been waiting since anniversary 10 . Maybe that's what will happen. Maybe he confessed to a cell mate. I've seen that happen in quite a few documentaries.It's better than Edgar's hidden in a cellar image.What was he thinking (ffs).
'''Police have now travelled to the woman’s home country, Bulgaria, in an attempt to make a breakthrough in the case.''
Hold on, according to the big anniversary press scam, the 'woman in Purple' WAS the breakthrough.
"There is no evidence they were involved but it would be good to eliminate them from the investigation," a source apparently told The Sun. ''
Ahh- THAT kind of breakthrough then.The ''leading nowhere' kind.How novel.Thank God The Sun are on the case. Without them it looks like a bad B movie and smells like BS.
''British expat, Jenny Murat, saw the women standing on the street on the night of the disappearance.''
Dial M for Murdoch. Dial M for Murat. Fancy that.
So, the information about Professor Plum-coloured suit was given to the police the morning after the disappearance and ten years later they're acting on it. Just as the funding extension is seeing the light of day we're reading more ''we're really leaving no stone unturned'' MSM stories. Predictable. It's a pattern.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-bulgaria-paedophiles-widow-missing-a8040631.html
VT
Björn at 18:31
DeleteJeremy Wilkins said he saw Jane Tanner around 20:30.
“I left the apartment and turned right. I walked via the lower street, looked to the building block where the McCann apartment was situated and saw a woman dressed in purple clothing.” (“Now I know her name, description of the clothes and photos which I have seen in the press” - statement 8 April 2008).
According to James Murray, Jenny Murat contacted Hugo Swire and Leicesterpolice police about her sighting around 8 pm (a woman standing on the corner under a lamp post, slight build and wearing a plum coloured jacket).
http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574547/Maddie-libel-detective-ruined-Retirement-retreat-
“After her son was wrongly made an arguido (Portuguese for suspect), she contacted Hugo Swire, a Tory MP in Devon, and Leicestershire police about her sighting but, astonishingly, she has not been interviewed to this day.
Speaking at home this week [May 2015?], she told the Sunday Express: “I am happy to speak to Scotland Yard. This woman was just outside Apartment 5a and it didn’t look right. It could be relevant.”
Strange Jenny Murat didn’t mention her sighting to Inspector Santos Martins, 15 May 2007.
A dish best served cold?
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccann-detectives-bulgaria-paedophiles-widow-missing-a8040631.html
‘Detectives working on Madeleine McCann’s case have travelled to Bulgaria in search of a paedophile’s widow known as the “woman in purple”.’
Buy time don't lose it!
“After her son was wrongly made an arguido (Portuguese for suspect), she contacted Hugo Swire, a Tory MP in Devon, and Leicestershire police about her sighting but, astonishingly, she has not been interviewed to this day''
DeleteKey words : ''After her son was wrongly made an arguido'' Shouldn't she have told the police, or anyone above the police (if they weren't listening) regardless of her son being made a suspect ? She wanted to set up a stand outside her home in order to hopefully hear something useful she could tell the detectives after all (Yeah, that's why she wanted to listen...). it's sort of similar to her son's taking sneaky peeps at paperwork regarding the investigation and asking detectives where they were looking and who for. He was a translator contracted to translate and nothing more.It seems almost comical that he was warned that he'd be caught 'in the game of two halves' and tailed by the policemen who he was working for some short time after. Quite the team is Team M.
VT
Anonymous 6 November 2017 at 20:05
Delete“A dish best served cold?”
“Buy time don't lose it!”
:)
T
Do you have to be so mean about Robert Murat and his mother VT?
DeleteThey were nice people trying to help, why don't you get that? And if RM saw this as an opportunity for his 15 minutes of fame, so what?
Didn't everyone who rushed out to PDL? All those spokesmen and women for the family giving press statements and flogging Good Quality Wristbands? How quickly did the Madeleine online shop open? Did they see Jenny with her roadside stall as competition? I wouldn't rule it out, because they got to the Patent Office pretty sharpish too.
I don't think I'm being mean. I'm merely calling it as I see it. If RM spotted this tragedy as an opportunity to grab his 15 minutes of fame, then it speaks volumes about his character. That's not 'nice people' I'm sorry. Let's not forget, members of the PJ -Amaral included- could smell a rat in him long before people became suspicious. Let is also remember that he's been taken into the police station twice as many times as the McCanns.
DeleteI've read his statements and seen his interviews, I've done the same with his mother. I've read his ex wife's comments too. If there's a library of observable body talk and conflicting statements regarding the parents, there's a mountain on Murat.He has plenty of 'markers' on him. Mrs Murat was quick to set up a stand to be helpful and hoping somebody would say something of importance to the investigation - she claims.The observation of the driver who looked British, driving the wrong way up her street was important, as was purple suit woman. In the meantime, Robert too was being 'helpful' trying to find out where the investigation was looking, much to the irritation of the PJ. Teamwork . In between times, in an understandable state of panic, Murat was in contact with Martin Brunt instead of a solicitor when he was trying to organise a final, believable clear alibi that would be confirmed by his mother and possibly some other family member ( but would attack any independent witnesses who claimed they'd seen him even though they had no stake in anything other than trying to help an investigation of a missing child).
VT
20:05
ReplyDeletehttp://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/574547/Maddie-libel-detective-ruined-Retirement-retreat-
"Jenny Murat....At 8pm on May 3, 2007, she went to a supermarket and then drove past Apartment 5a and saw a woman hanging around."
'Went to a supermarket AND THEN drove past Apartment 5a (i.e. afterwards).
Jenny Murat statement, 15.5.07:
About 19h50 she went to the "Batista" supermarket to buy bread. Then she went back to the house where she arrived more or less at the same time as Robert.
So she passes 5A on the way back from the Supermarket, arriving at...?
Robert Murat witness statement, 11.7.07:
"Confronted with the testimony of his mother who told that she arrived at the house around 20.30 and that Robert had also arrived at that moment, he says that he cannot account for having arrived at the same time as his mother."
So the woman in purple has been waiting outside 5A for half-an-hour, or the Murats arrived home too late for Jenny to have seen her?
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/PHILIP_ALLEN.htm
DeleteRob: Yes, that is the other side of it, the truth is that I was sitting here with my mother and ahm..I walked around the house and sat down, sat down (inaudible).
Phil: Hm.
Rob: And ahm..this is where the oldest people live basically.
Phil: Hm.
Rob: There are always ambulances passing by.
Phil: Hm.
Rob: And I was helping my mother do some little things, I think she arrived home at about eight ahm.. and I was..I think that I arrived first, I am sure, I think I am almost certain that I arrived first. I cannot remember exactly, that is the problem, I think I arrived first and joined her when she arrived and ahmm..basically I was here all night talking and laughing and that, we heard some sirens pass and I said on, that is just (inaudible) (laughs).
Phil: Hm.
Rob: That a girl has disappeared and that everything led on from there is a hell, it s a hell.
Phil: Hm.
Rob: But now I, I..what I am going to do now is to contact my sister, she is prepared to give a statement to the Leicester police.
Phil: Hm.
Morning Ros! I am Team Ros all the way! ;) Keep up the good work!
ReplyDeleteMany thanks Deana, it is always reassuring to hear from readers who support my efforts. My tactic for keeping safe, is to stay in plain sight and it is good to know readers are watching.
Delete@Björn 6 November at 18:31
ReplyDeleteSupposing Jenny Murat saw a ‘woman in purple’, then I don’t think it was Jane Tanner.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRUNT_MURAT.htm
“Call date: 15.05.2007
Martin Brunt: Is Robert there?
Jenny Murat: This is me..Jenny.
MB: This is Martin Brunt, Jenny.
JM: Yes.
MB: I thought it was better to send you my number when I call so that you know it’s me.
JM: Yes.
MB: Um...look...I just...I just wanted to know whether Robert has contacted his lawyer friend.
JM: At the moment, not yet because he is talking on the phone to his sister.
MB: OK.
JM: He spoke ..he also spoke to Leicester police who are with his sister at the moment.”
@Anonymous 6 November at 23:31
“Confronted with the testimony of his mother who told that she arrived at the house around 20.30 and that Robert had also arrived at that moment, he says that he cannot account for having arrived at the same time as his mother."
Robert Murat says he was at home from 8:15pm
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/BRUNT_MURAT.htm
“RM: But the truth is I have found some very good information, I hope it will be very good, unhappily out of sight, I really did make a phone call from her at eight fifteen at night.
MB: OK.
RM: And I made another call at eleven fifty three at night so, from the home telephone and to a number that only I would ring, it’s not a number my mother would dial.
MB: OK.
RM: Hmm, however, this could begin to be positive, but now I'm trying to find out whether my Dawn, I've just spoken to Dawn, ahhm...to see if she could, ahhmm...ask for the telephone records in the UK.
MB: OK
RM: And see if she calls me later tonight.
MB: Right.
RM: However I am not certain of how well this will turn out but if she could do this for me that would be great, I mean (inaudible) if, if they could prove that I was here from eight fifteen...”
@Anonymous6 November 2017 at 19:28
ReplyDeleteHi
Here's one reason as to why I suspect that the purple woman is Jane Tanner
Here's Jeremy Wilkin's rog statement:
Relative to whether I know Jane Tanner;
Now I know her name, description of the clothes and photos which I have seen in the press. At that time I knew of her as a member of the group but did not know her name. I do not remember having seen her when I spoke with Gerry, but I believe I saw her when I first ventured out. She was stopped on the street in front of one of the group's apartments when I passed her down towards the exit to my apartment. I do not know if it was her apartment or not. I remember that she was wearing the COLOUR PURPLE.
Björn at 11:02
DeleteIt is a possibility of course, but contrary to Jeremy Wilkins, Jenny Murat doesn’t seem to have a clue who 'purple woman' is, despite photos in the press and the chance of a Tanner 'live' sighting in Praia da Luz in the two weeks after Madeleine’s disappearance. Also, I wouldn’t call Jane Tanner ‘slight build’. Moreover, why didn’t Jenny Murat mention her woman in purple sighting in her statement on 15 May 2007?
NL
----------
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JENNIFER-MURAT.htm
“Still relating to the facts which occurred on the evening of 03 May 2007, the deponent states that on that night she was at home with her son Robert. They followed their normal routine: About 19h50 she went to the 'Batista' supermarket to buy bread. Then she went back to the house where she arrived more or less at the same time as Robert. Later they sat in the kitchen where they were talking for some time, having also eaten. She recalls that they were talking until close to midnight about Robert's project, related to the property and called 'Romigen.com’. Finally they went to their bedrooms to pass the night.”
Yes, I think the woman in purple was Jane Tanner too Bjorn, and I think she was acting as a look out.
DeleteWhat a shame the police did not record what each member of the group was wearing that night. Though it does seem odds on, Gerry was wearing his beige cargo trousers with buttons up the side. The police recall him dropping to his knees outside for some inexplicable reason - perhaps he was getting witness evidence for why the front of his trousers were dirty. In any event, the stricken Kate was able to do some laundry on the Saturday - during the 48 hours when they weren't functioning.
All of their clothes should of course, have been taken, but I suspect they weren't because even by the Friday morning, the PJ were being pressured to go easy on them.
Who know's how much evidence was lost with this approach. Where were the dirty clothes Maddie removed before her bath and jammies? Where were the beads she wore in hair? Where was her hairbrush? Where was her toothbrush? Where was her pink blanket? Why did they have to go back to Rothley to get Madeleine's DNA?
There are sirens going off all over the place, none of this is normal or what would be expected from the parents of a missing child.
Why did they publicise a picture of Madeleine as a toddler in a Christmas party dress? They were on holiday, they had 'up to the minute' photographs easily available on the cameras they had with them?
Why won't they co-operate with the police? And that seems to be ongoing, because it seems they have never given statements to Scotland Yard. I'm not buying for one minute, that the British police have never had a need to re-interview them. Imagine if the Yorkshire Ripper had phoned the police to confess, and they replied, no, no, don't trouble yourself, we'd rather find you the hard way!
This, imo, has cost £12m+ and taken 6+ years of Scotland Yard's time and resources, BECAUSE the main witnesses to the event that night, aren't talking. They are hiding behind lawyers. (Hello, Madeleine Fund).
But, the keeping schtum tactics aren't working. There seen to be some pretty determined people behind this investigation, people who are not prepared too give up.
Among them, I am sure, detectives just like Goncalo Amaral who will never give up on the victim and who are probably appalled at the way a fellow police has been treated by former suspects. I doubt any police officer in the world would support the right of former suspects to sue the detectives who investigated them.
Gerry and Kate, I think, have made a lot of powerful enemies along the way. They literally bit the hand that fed them, by turning on the press in the Leveson Inquiry, and they have made fools of powerful people. They cannot possibly be in a happy place.
Hi Rosalinda
DeleteI cannot but agree to what you say here. As for the tapas 9 clothing that night, Dr Payne in his RGT-interview couldn't even remember what he was wearing, but the social worker Yvonne Martin, who met him the day after has given a detailed description of how he then was dressed. She immediately felt that there was something very queer about his and the McCanns' behaviour. If the PJ had listened to her, the McCanns would have come under suspicion much sooner and an investigation of their and their friends' clothes would have come about much earlier. Given the circumstances under which the PJ had to do their job, who can blame them?
Björn7 November 2017 at 11:02
Delete''I passed her down towards the exit to my apartment. I do not know if it was her apartment or not. I remember that she was wearing the COLOUR PURPLE.''
Purple top and trousers ? Purple hat and skirt ? Purple Suit ? Mrs M was specific. It's hard to forget a plum coloured suit worn by a woman stood alone on an empty street. has Tanner ever been photographed or described suited up ? Would Tanner be dressed in a smart suit if she( or whoever imaginary purple suit woman is) was about to embark on running around trying not to attract attention as a body was moved around ?
VT
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 November 2017 at 16:18
Delete''Yes, I think the woman in purple was Jane Tanner too Bjorn, and I think she was acting as a look out.''
In a bright Purple suit surrounded by magnolia and white coloured walls with people milling about.Great plan.
You have taken the word 'purple' and transformed it into a woman dressed head to toe in a bright purple suit and off to Ascot. All fantasy on your part.
DeleteA simple purple top is not a high visibility jacket. Purple is in fact one of the more muted dark colours - it's not brick red or garish black.
As for being dressed like a Belisha beacon in a background of magnolia and white coloured walls, nonsense. And besides few people take camouflage gear with them when they go on holiday.
given her surroundings it would stand out like a very large sore thumb.It's that thing you avoid, common sense and something pointing somewhere other than the McCanns, your crusade.
Delete@Anonymous6 November 2017 at 20:05
ReplyDelete&
@VT
Hi
When Yvonne Martin arrived at the McCanns' apartment, she heard Kate screaming "a couple has taken her". Could she by that have meant Mr and Mrs Purple? Is that what the brilliant assistant chief detective inspector Mark Rowley and his team now believe?
Too much of a stretch for me, Bjorn. As far as the 'new lead' goes, only Murat's mother seen the purple woman. It's more probable that KM was guessing hopefully as it's easier to deal with that scenario as it has Madeleine stolen but safe.It's preferable to thinking she'd been kidnapped by killers or perverts. I'm not sure what Mark Rowley or his team now believe. I'm not sure what they've been told to say what they believe explicitly as yet. I suppose it depends on forthcoming funding.If it arrives, so will the 'new leads'.
DeleteVT
Anonymous 7 November 2017 at 13:55
ReplyDeleteT to VT
“I suppose it depends on forthcoming funding.If it arrives, so will the 'new leads'.”
:)
T
NL/ 7 November 2017 at 15:21
ReplyDeleteHi NL
I may get things wrong (I don't mind if anyone correct me) regarding chronological order here, but Jermy Wilkin's witness statement was first, I suppose.
I don't really think that Jenny Murat saw anything, just made it up, for unknown reason, because she had heard about it from someone. Possibly from her son.
Jeremy Wilkins, however, if the quote here below, which I found in PJ files, refers to the evening when Madeleine disappeared, must be very reliable. He really saw purple woman, and believes that it was Jane Tanner, which makes sense to me. If the McCanns staged an abduction and disposed of Madeleine's body, they must have co-operated with their friends. So Jane Tanner may have had a very good reason to be where Jeremy Wilkins spotted her.
From the PJ files
"I do not remember having seen her when I spoke with Gerry, but I believe I saw her when I first ventured out. She was stopped on the street in front of one of the group's apartments when I passed her down towards the exit to my apartment"
''I don't really think that Jenny Murat saw anything, just made it up, for unknown reason, because she had heard about it from someone. Possibly from her son.''
DeleteUnknown reason indeed.If she made it up, then she's lied. That's something you don't need to do if you have nothing to hide, am I right ? Possibly from her son ? That would fit yes.The unknown reason shouldn't be a neglected area. Of course there's always the possibility that the family Murat spied yet another free lunch. Their dear friend, Brunt Of The Yard( or is it Sky) was in regular contact with them. The Purple stranger story would go on to provide well timed dramatic newspaper sales. They've done OK from the newspapers and courts have the Murats. Good to be connected I suppose..
The purple meanie being Tanner has some obvious question marks above it.First, it was still daylight.If the suspected staged abduction was about to take place, why would one of the players be standing around conspicuously in full view should anyone pass by. Why would such a vital game get underway while it was early and light, rather than dark and when people would likely be asleep.Why would any of the friends willingly take part anyway ? The risks far outweigh anything. They'd gain nothing. My guess is that Purple suit wasn't there.Nobody was.It's an invention of Mrs M. Why- only she( and possibly her son) know.
VT
Why would Jenny Murat lie to the police in a serious crime where the life of a small child was at stake?
DeleteWhy would she risk criminal charges of perverting the course of justice?
I think Jenny Murat, like her son Robert, was trying to help a British family who had been struck by tragedy. Their immediate need being translators.
This assumption that everyone has sinister motives is very cynical VT. The McCanns were pleading for help on our TV screens, yet they were turning away people who were offering to help them. Jez Wilkins who volunteered to help with the search on the night - not it's necessary, they told him. Yvonne Martin, British social worker, who responded immediately, was sent packing. The planeloads who arrived from the UK however were given 5* treatment. Do you question their motives VT?
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton8 November 2017 at 11:42
Delete''Why would Jenny Murat lie to the police in a serious crime where the life of a small child was at stake?''
For her own child. The one who was brought in twice for questioning.
''Why would she risk criminal charges of perverting the course of justice? ''
As above.
''I think Jenny Murat, like her son Robert, was trying to help a British family who had been struck by tragedy. Their immediate need being translators''
Robert Murat was a translator, yes. If he didn't live there, I think they could have found one somewhere. It was a contract but not a job description.It didn't entitle him to try and read police notes or question which way they were going with the investigation.Nor should it have entitled him to pop up with PJ dog handlers and ask them. JM was in place to listen to the general mood of the public. Both kept Brunt in the picture.
''This assumption that everyone has sinister motives is very cynical VT.''
I agree.But I didn't say everyone has them.I said Murat did.It wasn't me who brought him to a station for interrogation twice or who warned him that i'd 'get him' in the 'second half'.Were the police being cynical ?It's cynical to base a mountain of suspicions on documentaries we've watched and questionable pseudo psychologists who read blinks, body language, and facial expressions. A microbe of evidence would say more and be considered proof.
''The planeloads who arrived from the UK however were given 5* treatment. Do you question their motives VT?''
Too right I question them. That was the 'operation smother the truth' crew. It was fast, slick, well organised and expertly executed.But for who and why ? Find him and crack the case.
VT
Suspicion of Robert Murat ended when the police files were shelved and he was released from his arguido status. There was no reference to Robert Murat losing the opportunity to prove his innocence. No-one, other than headcases Bennett and Hall have pursued him this past 10 years, and if there was any chance he was involved, they would have.
DeleteYou are assuming Jenny Murat had a need to cover for her child VT, she didn't, no dogs alerted at the Murats' property.
In your final paragraph, I assume you are not referring to extended family and friends here? So who do mean VT? The lawyers, the crisis managers, the 'psychologists'? Or maybe you mean the Government spokesman and the police agencies?
There is no need to hint VT, you are anonymous after all.
''Suspicion of Robert Murat ended when the police files were shelved and he was released from his arguido status''
DeleteThe same can be said about the status of the McCanns.Senior officers have gone public to say that.So, we turn away from Murat but not the parents ? I don't see why. If the police were wrong to leave the McCanns alone, why were they wrong to leave Murat alone ?If they were so sure that their 'gut instinct' that the parents were hiding something from so early, why the intense scrutiny of Murat and having two bites at him ?
'' No-one, other than headcases Bennett and Hall have pursued him this past 10 years, and if there was any chance he was involved, they would have.''
Why would they ? What makes them special ? When did they graduate from Detective School ?
''You are assuming Jenny Murat had a need to cover for her child VT, she didn't, no dogs alerted at the Murats' property.''
Why would they ? Maybe if Madeleine had been there at some point they would have. Who's suggesting she had been ? Did anything come of the alerts anyway ?
''The lawyers, the crisis managers, the 'psychologists'? Or maybe you mean the Government spokesman and the police agencies? ''
Yes, that lot.Those with the power to influence.
VT
@VT 7 November 2017 at 18:52
ReplyDeleteHi again
"Would Tanner be dressed in a smart suit if she( or whoever imaginary purple suit woman is) was about to embark on running around trying not to attract attention as a body was moved around ?"
Why not? It would've been the most perfect devil in disguise!
The success of such a cloak and dagger plan is dependent on an eye for detail, Bjorn. And we know where the Devil is, don't we ?
Delete:-)
VT
Hello Björn (18:20)
ReplyDeleteIn his statement 8 April 2008 Jeremy Wilkins said that Jane Tanner is the ‘woman in purple’ he saw around 8:30pm in front of the apartment. However, as far as I know, Jeremy Wilkins doesn’t mention ‘a woman in purple’ in his handwritten statement, dated 7 May 2007.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm
“We returned to our apartment. We decided to spend the evening in, watching television. Our son was awake and unable to sleep. I decided to take him for a walk in his pram. I left about 8:15 to 8:30 pm. I was pushing the pram around the complex and went to the toilet near the bar. I could not see inside the restaurant. As I got the baby to sleep, I was on my way back to the apartment. I came out at the top road.”
Maybe it just didn’t seem as important at the time. Jane Tanner was on her way to the Tapas restaurant around 8:30pm. Being alone, because Russell O’Brien stayed in the apartment as his youngest daughter was still awake, Jane Tanner was watching the McCanns’ apartment to see whether they had already left?
I don’t know what Jenny Murat did or did not see, but I agree with your “for unknown reason” when it comes to the sudden highlighting of a woman of slight build in a plum coloured jacket, standing on the corner under a lamp post.
NL
@NL 7 November 2017 at 22:22
DeleteHello NL
Yes,all the statements of whomever witnessed just days after Madeleine's disappearance should be assessed in the light of what he/she has said or witnessed about later. It's true that JW mentioned "Tanner-purple" later, but wasn't asked so many questions in his first interview as it seems.
@ to Anyone who are interested.
A little bit off topic perhaps, but I've tried to find Neil Berry's and Raj Balu's witness statements from 2007, but failed. Just their so called rogatory interviews are to be found. I cannot understand why they should be kept secret, if that would be the case.
Björn at 13:48
Deletehttp://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/MISSING_PAGES.htm
"MISSING PAGES FROM THE FILES ARE NOT IN THE DVD LINK ORIGINAL FILES MCCANN PJ FILES DOES NOT HAVE ACCESS TO THE MISSING FILES"
Scroll half page down.
"Further documents missing from the DVD.
Statements missing from UK holiday makers."
I have the original DVD, but I can't speak Portuguese. But can confirm there are missing pages. The kind people who did the translations tried to analyse the missing files, many have tried but I don't recall any conclusions drawn. Except the obvious - police forces don't necessarily lay all their cards on the table.
DeleteEqually, I draw a conclusion from what I call negative sightings, that is people who were in the area who saw NOTHING. Nothing is nothing. And over the years heard rumbles that such witnesses exist. There must have been people in the area from X time to X time, apart from JW who walked in ever decreasing circles for around an hour saw & heard nothing and didn't even know what he saw or what side of the road he was on! when speaking to Mr McCann.
I hold in high regard those who did the translation and equally took the time to explain some of the legal jargon, or general information beyond merely translating the written word.
@ VT Almost everything about the Murats, mother and son, and for that matter their relatives the Eveleighs, is suspicious. Take the Nuno Lourenco statement that points the finger at Wojcek Krokowski as a would be child-abducting paedophile. Turns out WK had meals most days in Ralph Eveleigh's beach bar, and Eveleigh advised him to go to a specific record shop in Lisbon where he was captured on CCTV. Coincidence? Jenny Murat: sets up a rival information table, makes up the 'purple woman' tale, and turns out she was a mate of Mrs Pamela Fenn on the Residents Committee. Then someone called 'Robert' rings the PJ and tells them to look for 'some Englishwoman' who might have heard Maddie crying. When we look at Murat himself, the list of suspicions about him is endless - lying to police about his actions, sneaking a look at PJ documents whilst he was interpreting, cosy relationship with Martin Brunt. Why, even Martin Smith's son Peter admitted that his Dad and Murat had (quote) 'met several times'
ReplyDeleteI hear you, anon 22:23. That whole area offers some fine morsels to chew upon...
DeleteI wasn't shocked by the porn discovery on Murat's computer. He's over 18, so why not. I was surprised that he used encrypted emails though.Why would he do that? Why would anyone ? What became of the online property business website - or even business. Why would his ex wife sell her story to a UK paper stating how she has 100% faith in him yet hid her child's passport 'just in case' ? Why would he ('off the record') slip into a conversation with a reporter, that he was going through a bitter divorce when it was more than amicable ? Why is he seen in so many photographs conspicuously walking among searching PJ officers when he had no official place there . His intense need to help ? Yet he avoided the parents and friends as well and often as he could. How much did he make from suing the papers ? Why, if Murat wasn't related to the McCanns through family or friendship, was Brunt calling him and his mother so often after Murat had been on his translating session( and rifling the paperwork of the PJ) ? Why was Murat tailed all day ? Tip of the iceberg..
VT
Having read the latest comments VT and Team McCann are trying awfully hard to convince us that 1 The murats are up to their neck in all this and 2 the lady in purple was Jane Tanner. Seems the murats are not to be believed about anything other than their sighting of the woman in purple whereas Jez Wilkins who was prepared to possitively identify ( no doubt expressed) that it was Tanner is not to be trusted
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, as far as I've seen /heard / read about the Murat boy, the McCanns don't seem to be suspicious of him at all. I find that strange.
DeleteVT
VT
DeleteMurat, like the McCanns was made an arguido, with a Legal status. This status has been suspended pending further evidence by the Portuguese Judiciary. The three argidos have not conducted a reconstruction nor attended a constituted court to prove their innocence (or guilt) regarding the disappearance of Madeline McCann. They should all be regarded equally in terms of suspicion.
Tiocfaidh ar la.
Anonymous at 04:07
ReplyDeleteThe "Murats" are part of "Team McCann".
----------
https://www.theguardian.com/law/2012/mar/26/mccann-open-letter-david-cameron
"We urge you to take action now to amend the legal aid, sentencing and punishment of offenders bill to specifically remove libel and privacy cases, or you will stand accused of being unfair to ordinary people and giving yet more power to large media corporations and corporate libel bullies."
Christopher Jefferies
Gerry and Kate McCann
Peter Wilmshurst
Robert Murat
Hardeep Singh
Nigel Short
Zoe Margolis
That piece doesn't talk about those named as being a team. It talks about the Tory Big Brother fascist state removing our human rights drip by drip. The names cited are merely used as they have all been public news and are recognised by everyone. They're representative of ordinary people who can find themselves victims of crime or slander or libel and have no means to challenge it or defend themselves.
DeleteVT
"During the evening of Wednesday 31 October 2007, Jeremy and Bridget were visited at their home address by DC 1756 and DC 4356 from the Leicestershire Op Task team. This visit was organized to attempt to gain background information in relation to the McCanns and members of their group whilst on holiday in the Praia da Luz resort."
ReplyDeletehttp://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY_BRIGET.htm
"They went to bed about 2300hrs but were waken about 0100hrs by a knock at the door. On answering the door they spoke with the resort manager and a person they knew was a member of the group but they only knew him as Matthew. It was then they found out that Madeleine was missing.
They had no further contact with the family apart from seeing them in passing whilst at the resort.
Several weeks later, Jeremy received calls from Gerry in relation to gaining permission from him to use his name in a portfolio of evidence being compiled by an organization employed by the McCanns. They were very persistent and made several attempts to contact him both at work and at home. They had no objection to being included but were concerned as to the method being used."
Presume you have read the BOD news paper item
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
Money donated to the fund.
Hardly worth knocking on their door or sending the police around when it's all been published in the Guardian.
14 December 2007
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
"In November, he [JW] inched through the events of that May night with Leicestershire detectives, but he saw nothing suspicious, nothing that would further the investigation."
Woman in purple?
"Earlier that day [May 3] there had been tennis lessons for the children, with some of the parents watching proudly as their girls ran across the court chasing tennis balls. They took photos. Madeleine must have been there, but I couldn't distinguish her from the others. They all looked the same - all blonde, all pink and pretty."
In spite of the fact that her daughter played and danced with Madeleine at the Mini Club, BOD couldn't distinguish Madeleine from the others.
"So my heart goes out to them, Gerry and Kate, the couple we remember from our Portuguese holiday. They had a beautiful daughter, Madeleine, who played and danced with ours at the kiddie club. That's who we remember."
@Anonymous 8 November 2017 at 09:21
ReplyDeleteHi
The theme is "Freedom of Speech"
Really interesting quotes, considering who's bullying and persecuting whom.
"you will stand accused of being unfair to ordinary people" (UNFAIR to ordinary people, especially the poor workers at the Ocean Club as well as to GA, is just what the McCanns have been all those years)
"giving yet more POWER to large media corporations and corporate libel bullies."(like to team McCann with their Fund, to their team of lawyers and to their official media spokesman Clarence Mitchell, which among other things has led to the death of Brenda Leyland)
self awareness/self insight (I hope the words are proper English words) are not the McCanns' strongest points, I'd say.
Bjorn
ReplyDeleteThe open letter was addressed to David Cameron and his Government and talked about it's psychotic hatred of the millions of people who can't afford a legal defence generally.It reflects his vision of taking the UK back to 1947 and then further back.The letter was accusatory and well aimed and worded. You can't use that to accuse the McCanns, Team McCann or any other target. It diminishes the important points made and disregards the intention of the letter. Some things are bigger than one police investigation nobody wants to solve.Is this really how desperate people can be when searching for whatever they can find to prop up their 'strong' arguments ?
VT
Hi VT
ReplyDeleteDidn't the McCanns enjoy seeing Gonzalo almost defenceless, when they sued him for libel. Wasn't it a big disappointment that he finally got financial help to defend his honour. Don't you think that Brenda Leyland felt completely destroyed, when Martin Brunt made it clear to her what the McCanns were capable of doing by means of all their contacts in higher places and all their well paid lawyers.
The McCanns assumed that none of them could afford to defend themselves, and that's exactly the reason as to why they attacked them. The more defenceless the easier target.
And what about the dead "suspects", such as Euclides Monteiro, Hewitt, Freud and the deceased Mr purple paedophile. The latter has now come under suspicion. Who defend them? The McCanns couldn't care less. The McCanns are always talking about themselves and their suffering and not about "the millions of people who can't afford a legal defence"
It's funny VT how you are suspicious about the murats because of the many times Robert was interviewed and yet nothing in the police files raises your suspicions about the The McCanns. You also say you find it strange after everything you heard about the Murat boy that the McCanns are not suspicious of him. I find it strange if they are innocent as they claim to be that they are not suspicious of their friends who knew the child was on her own ( apparently) but then again if you know what happened her you are not suspicious of anybody
ReplyDeleteThe last two post's show exactly why the likes of VT should be allowed to carry on posting,they quite clearly show them him/her up for what they are.Who ever use's VT as a signature is at least two writers occasionally say 1/20 they post something approaching reasonable.
DeleteYes, Psychic Detective. Whereas you contribute streams of constructive wisdom. Don't be afraid of thinking. It's a good habit to acquire.Or you could always close your eyes until the VT has been safely scrolled above your head.
DeleteVT
Anonymous8 November 2017 at 23:03
Delete''It's funny VT how you are suspicious about the murats because of the many times Robert was interviewed and yet nothing in the police files raises your suspicions about the The McCanns''
True, nothing raises my suspicions about the McCanns with regard to the disappearance of their child and / or the alleged burial of the child.But then nothing has raised the suspicion among the police either, and they've got the files in a cabinet. That sort of sways things for me. I find it strange about them not suspecting Murat, yes. Especially as the PJ were on him like flies. I won't go into his 'profile'. But I see more regarding him , rather than the parents, that keeps me interested in this.Far more. I'm not suggesting anything beyond an involvement at some stage.But, again, a lot about him, his bizarre cuckold relationship,and his friendship with the Russian who was 'there to build his website for a new business' has been put in a dark corner in favour of the pursuit of the parents. The 'privileged middle class parents' that is.I'd rather dig around in something of substance than fly around the internet looking for crackpot readings of what 'they really mean' when they talk...
Why would they be suspicious of the friends who were sat with them when the event happened ? It was the internet detective agency who included them into their favoured conspiracy theory. It was them who considered that a group of friends would risk jail, being parted from their children, and losing their careers when they had no need to.I think - stress 'think'- they are suspicious of certain political figures and the relationship between them and the media.They might even be suspicious of a few policemen too, and not just Portugal's .Nobody can say with any degree of certainty. We can only guess.That's all I'm doing.I'm happy to admit that I speculate and try to understand as much as possible as no evidence exists to lend any of my hypotheses weight. I'd be foolish to claim I didn't need any. Anybody would be..
VT
To VT
DeleteYou said: "True, nothing raises my suspicions about the McCanns with regard to the disappearance of their child and / or the alleged burial of the child."
Despite their evident contradictory and continual lies, cadaverine alerts, Ward of Court, unseemly Ltd Company haste, that they never physically searched, that they refer to their child like an object, the need to scribble out their alibis and ever changing timelines... ad infinitum.
You said: "But then nothing has raised the suspicion among the police either, and they've got the files in a cabinet."
You do not know that. Even Redwood was unsure whether MBM left 5A alive. This case is political, therefore, the police do not call the shots.
In all, for you, the Emperor's New Clothes are a very good fit.
-
SixYearsInaComaMan
Actually VT, I should point out the 'friends' weren't sat with them all evening, they were going backwards and forwards to the apartments, where the children were, and where the McCanns' apartment was unlocked. Any one of them, while missing from the table, could have played a part in Madeleine's disappearance.
DeleteIt should be noted that Robert Murat was interviewed by the police many times because he was willing to co-operate, he had nothing to hide.
DeleteThe McCanns and their friends on the other hand lawyered up and stopped talking.
VT 7.11, 23:25
ReplyDelete"I wasn't shocked by the porn discovery on Murat's computer. He's over 18"
VT 8.11, 13:42
"To be honest, as far as I've seen /heard / read about the Murat boy"
Who's this? Or are you showing your own age?
Was there a point being made there ?
DeleteVT
12:10
DeleteWas a question answered there?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2007/dec/14/ukcrime.madeleinemccann
ReplyDeleteBridget O'Donnell:
“The British police came round shortly after our return. Jes was pleased to give them a statement. The Portuguese police had never asked.”
That is not true.
07-05-2007
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm#p2p510
Fax from Gonçalo Amaral to Detective Chief Superintendent Robert Hall on questions to ask Jes Wilkins.
To whom it may concern
ReplyDeleteJust a few words about the absurd search for Madeleine's kidnapper in Bulgaria, as it needs to be discussed.
THE SUN 6th November 2017, 3:00 pm
”Former Scotland Yard detective Colin Sutton says the most “most likely and credible scenario” for Maddie’s disappearance is a targeted kidnap - possibly to replace some grieving parents’ own dead child” Really!
First of all. How could anyone seriously believe that it’s likely, that grieving parents, who have tragically lost a child would compensate that loss by stealing somebody else’s child. I cannot imagine that the McCanns or anyone in a similar situation would even consider that idea.
Children of all ages are being adopted from poorer families and orphanages in far-away places around the world by families living in our traditional wealthy and prosperous western societies, and not the other way around. There’s is no need, wish or even possibility for anyone, who lives in poverty in Bulgaria or elsewhere to steal or buy a small child abroad, let alone in their own country.
Colin Sutton as well as Jim Gamble have heard about traumatised young women, who have lost their children after berth and then gone mad, but such women are not capable of organizing a kidnapping, taking their prey abroad or keeping it hidden, and why would anyone help them doing so.
As far as I know there’s been no traumatised woman seen lurking around the McCanns apartment and no reports about any family in PDL, having tragically lost their child after birth or later, apart from the McCanns. Collin and Gamble aren’t just speculating, but what they’re claiming is completely nonsense.
Björn at 10:40
DeleteWell, it's The Sun. Bulgaria does trafficking in arms though.
As for Colin Sutton, here is another 'quote' from an article in The Sun/the Mirror, dated 22nd April 2017.
'Former Scotland Yard detective Colin Sutton says the most "most likely and credible scenario" for Maddie's disappearance is a targeted kidnap - once those closely linked to the tot have been ruled out.
Speaking to the Mirror, he questioned why traffickers wouldn't have taken one of Maddie's twin baby siblings instead - who would have no memory of their previous life and less physical identity.
He said: "A trafficking ring is more likely than a lone paedophile or paedophile ring.
"But unless the order was specifically for a young blonde girl, why her and not one of the twins?'
et cetera
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/3386806/madeleine-mccann-maddie-stolen-to-replace-dead-child/
Frightening that both of these men were professional police officers Bjorn, and one had a position of considerable power. They clearly have no understanding whatsoever of human behaviour. The idea that a bereaved mother would deliberately inflict such pain on an innocent family is abhorrent.
DeleteAs you say Bjorn, the whole idea that Madeleine was deliberately targeted is ludicrous. If this were fiction, and they were plotlines, they wouldn't even make it to the first production meeting.
Well said Bjorn and to think that both them men held positions of authority and trust.........seems like anything is for sale these days even your self respect. What an insult to women who go through the tragedy of losing a child......their way of dealing with it is to steal somebody else's child. I can speak from personal experience that women who lose a child find it very difficult to be around other children for a long time let alone run off to the algarve to steal somebody elses I wish either of them would quote examples of when this happened. Also when this woman whoever she maybe arrived home with a child who looked remarkably like a child whose face was all over the media don't you think her friends and family and neighbours might be the tiniest wee bit suspicious or had they all gone mad with the grief also.
ReplyDeleteGrieving parents also don't set up fighting funds hire extradition lawyers and sue the policeman who tried to find out what happened their daughter
Bravo for pointing out the absurdity of these ridiculous ideas from former British police officers 21:38. Unfortunately, as former police officers, they can say virtually anything and the headline skimmers and the unenlightened will believe them.
DeleteMy sympathy for your bereavement 21:38, and thank you for your touching account of your own experience, I am sure it will resonate with many.
JG especially would have us believe this sort of thing happens all the time, but as you say, where are examples? Or for that matter where are the people behind the stats? Apparently the equivalent of a packed inner school go missing every year, yet in 10 years we have only ever heard about Madeleine.
Your last paragraph sums it up in nutshell 21:38. Quite.
''Grieving parents also don't set up fighting funds hire extradition lawyers and sue the policeman who tried to find out what happened their daughter''
DeleteThe fighting fund was a Cameron / Government idea and strategy. They tried to sue somebody who accused them of burying their own child but couldn't produce any evidence of it. He's made a lot of money from it, however. Maybe we could consider integrity at some point. His. If every microscopic detail of the McCanns can be put under a microscope by the imaginative pitchforkers, why not study him too .Or Murat. Or Redwood. Or Blair and Brown. And Brunt. Are they too dull for the story ?
VT
Kate McCann ('madeleine'):
Delete"IFLG [International Family Law Group] told us that we needed to set up a ‘fighting fund’. They would devise the objectives of the fund and instruct a leading charity law firm, Bates Wells and Braithwaite (BWB), to draw up articles of association.
'The fighting fund was a Cammeron/Government idea and strategy'.
DeleteLOL, you are not getting away with that, and that you would even try to, suggests Team McCann are now ashamed of the indecent haste with which they set up the fighting fund.
In the summer of 2007, New Labour were in government, the McCanns spoke to Blair and Brown, not Cameron. So why would the leader of the Opposition tell the parents to set up a fighting fund?
Why would any government tell parents in a missing child case to set up a fighting fund? It would be like telling them to go and find her themselves.
The Fighting Fund was ALL Team McCann, members of this very proactive family were giving interviews to the press and flooding social media with chain emails and appeals.
Why should Goncalo Amaral's life be put under scrutiny by 'imaginative pitchforkers' - he was the detective. Do you also suggest imaginative pitchforkers should put the lives of DCIs Redwood and Wall, under a microscope?
I have to say, in the whole history of crime, I have never seen suspects put the blame on the detective leading the investigation. The personal life and character of GA has nothing to do with her disappearance. How do you not get that?
Oh, I've just seen your last words, you do indeed suggest Redwood, Blair, Brown, Brown et al, should be put under scrutiny.
They are not too dull for the story VT, they just have nothing to do with the events of 3rd May 2007, they weren't there. Even if Tony Blair turns out be a mad axe killer, he didn't steal Madeleine McCann.
Given the contents of this latest post from you VT, I do hope the officers of Operation Grange are bracing themselves for the backlash. What have Team McCann been digging up about their private lives?
This time around however, I don't see the British tabloids splashing unflattering pictures and making derogatory comments about individual officers from Scotland Yards as they did with Goncalo Amaral.
'The fighting fund was a Cameron/Government idea and strategy'.
Delete''LOL, you are not getting away with that, and that you would even try to, suggests Team McCann are now ashamed of the indecent haste with which they set up the fighting fund.''
Is the capitlised 'lol' supposed to give your default dismissiveness some more weight ?
'Scotland Yard has been reviewing the evidence for two years after David Cameron personally intervened in the high-profile case....Home Secretary Theresa May has now approved a move to fund the cost of a proper investigation..A spokesman said: "The Home Office remains committed to supporting the search for Madeleine McCann...
'However, Scotland Yard began a Home Office-funded review in 2011 following the intervention of David Cameron.'
How naive can you actually get ? If this was a UK 'national security' issue( as opposed to a police investigation), then it's high on the agenda of whichever Government is in charge. Military Intelligence( who Amaral is convinced took part in a cover up) don't take sides, they take orders.
''Why would any government tell parents in a missing child case to set up a fighting fund?''
The terms 'fighting fund' and 'war fund' were coined by who ?
So David Cameron and May didn't talk about extra funding they 'found' and that Cameron claimed he didn't know existed ? I though you'd looked 'from every angle'..
''I have to say, in the whole history of crime, I have never seen suspects put the blame on the detective leading the investigation. The personal life and character of GA has nothing to do with her disappearance. How do you not get that? ''
The quote( out of context) was about his integrity. That he decided to write a book telling the world he considered that the parents were liars was bad enough, but that they buried their own child ? And, to this day, nothing supports his theory.They aren't 'suspects' -how come you don't get that ? They only blamed him for defaming their name and slandering it.Had he been proven to be telling the truth and correct in his assertions, it would be game over anyway.
''They are not too dull for the story VT, they just have nothing to do with the events of 3rd May 2007, they weren't there.''
You don't tidy up until the mess has happened.
Links
https://news.sky.com/story/madeleine-mccann-home-office-funds-inquiry-10442890
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/madeleinemccann/10122377/Home-Office-to-fund-Met-Police-investigation-into-Madeleine-McCann-disappearance.HTML
VT
'Fighting Fund' is Team McCann as well you know VT.
DeleteLet me explain this to you as if you were a 4 year old. The 'fighting fund' is also known as the Madeleine Fund. It was set up by Gerry, Kate, friends and family. It was funded by donations from the public, as if it were a Charity, even though it wasn't.
NO GOVERNMENT has had anything to do The Madeleine Fund, the public money is given to a public service, ie. the police, in order to investigate the child's disappearance. NONE of it is given to Gerry and Kate's Madeleine Fund (not a charity).
You really need to separate the two in your head VT, your attempts to blur the lines are becoming tedious. Team McCann were once so proud of their fundraising abilities, now they are trying to distance themselves. Why would that be VT?
A note to Björn from the Nordic branch of the hate the Mccann club. (if anyone believes that Björn is where he says he is from then they must be as stupid as Ros)
ReplyDeleteAsk Ros how accurate articles in the Sun are - she has personal experience.
Colin Sutton was a 10 minutes of fame guy who turned up on the 10th anniversary of the case of a still missing child to make money from anywhere he could get it (ring any bells Ros?. He has shown that he has no more knowledge about the case than anyone on the street taken at random.
If you want to quote the Sun and Sutton then don't link it to the Mccanns.
Anon @00:14
DeleteRemind us again what rag serialised KM's book,they whether they like it or not having sold out to the devil will always be linked to what ever story appears in the sun concerning their daughter,mighten be right,mighten be wrong but thats how it is.
So I'm too stupid to know Bjorn isn't from Sweden? Let me guess, he's a double agent from MI5 (or is it MI6) based in Moscow? Nah, the lets all be paranoid game doesn't really work for me.
DeleteSo Team McCann have gone right off The Sun yet. What a shame, I'm sure many of their readers were hanging on for the yucky follow up to 'I couldn't make love to Gerry' - they will bitterly disappointed.
If you are quoting Andy Warhol there, it's actually 15 minutes, and Colin Sutton still has about 7 to go.
I don't really think Team McCann are in any position to make cheap jibes at the way anyone earns their living. The world will never forget the way in which they immediately cashed in on their tragedy by putting plastic donation buckets all around the holiday resort. Then there was the opening of the online shop, get your Good Quality Wristbands here, and the must have Madeleine belt badge, as modelled by Kate on her way to the police station.
If you want to get to get into a money and tackiness argument Team McCann, bring it on :)
Anonymous at 00:14
Delete("If you want to quote the Sun and Sutton then don't link it to the Mccanns.")
Madeleine McCann's parents have thanked The Sun for keeping the search for their missing daughter alive.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/2028106/official-find-madeleine-mccann-campaign-says-the-sun-has-kept-hunt-for-missing-daughter-alive/
Flags? The sun was yellow and the sky was blue.
"If you want to get to get into a money and tackiness argument Team McCann, bring it on"
DeleteRos don't forget the suggestion by Gerry that his grieving wife should be pictured in a swimsuit in order to promote the fund. That was too much even for creepy Clarence
VT 8 Nov 23:03
DeleteDidn’t the police in Portugal make them suspects, didn’t they bring cadaver dogs to apartment 5A, the McCanns rented villa and to their hired car. Didn’t the Portuguese Supreme Court say after studying the POLICE FILES that they were right to make them suspects and they shouldn’t consider themselves cleared (or words to that effect) ………….You are a hoot with your “nothing has raised the suspicion among the police either”
You find it strange that the McCanns don’t suspect Murat saying there is a lot about him and then you go on to quote a key example of “his bizarre cuckold relationship, and his friendship with the Russian who was 'there to build his website for a new business' – Websites are set up for new business all over the world every day so it can’t be that which raises your suspicions. Don’t take the readers here as fools by trying to lead them towards Murat and the Russian at the exclusion of the McCanns. Spell out what you think (or know) is the relationship between the McCanns, their friends (and others), Murat and a Russian with information stored on a computer.
You state about Murat “I'm not suggesting anything beyond an involvement at some stage” which suggests that you minimalizes his part in whatever went on. You do kinda give yourself away here as no part played in events that lead to the disappearance of a young child could be minimalized so what actually are you getting at here. If it was an abduction what possible minor part could Murat have played? Or maybe you are suggesting that Murat and the Russian played some part in events that did not directly impact on the disappearance of the child but played a part in other events that maybe the disappearance of the child may have exposed.
You state “I think - stress 'think'- they are suspicious of certain political figures and the relationship between them and the media. They might even be suspicious of a few policemen too, and not just Portugal's” – Do these political figures include Gordon Brown of the “ I’ve spoken to Gordon Brown a few times” or the Tony Blair of the “ I’ll do anything I can to help” or the David Cameron “I start a £12m review and investigation” or are you talking about the policemen in the Jim Gamble “you can speak at our conference about missing children even though you are the chief suspect in the case of your own missing child” of the just call me Stu of the Leicestershire police who” we called for comfort the night we were made suspects in a crime by another countries police force” Or maybe you are talking about the officers of Operation Grange .....in that case I do think they have cause to be suspicious at the very least.
As for “the friends who were sat with them when the event happened “ didn’t one of these friends make a statement that they were in the apartment alone the night the child disappeared. The only other person other that the parents who was in the apartment during the hour that she was supposed to have disappeared. I don’t know about you but if my child disappeared and I was innocent of any involvement I would have my suspicions about this person above a stranger who I had no proof was there other than the jemmied shutters that amazingly got repaired before the police arrived.
@Anonymous10 November 2017 at 00:14
DeleteHi
Interesting stuff about identity, really.
I, myself, sometimes have doubts about whether some people come from where they say, or if they are what they claim to be.
I’ve many times listened to what the lovely actress Mercedes Mason (she has recently become an American citizen) tells us about her own background. I’ve been both curious and suspicious about what she says, as she claims to have grown up in my own home town Linköping/Sweden, which she allegedly left at the age of 12 with her parents, as she seems to completely have forgotten the Swedish language.
However, she appeared on an American talk show, not so long ago and confirmed once again, that she had lived her 12 first years in LINKÖPING. After hearing her pronunciation of our town’s name, I’ve no longer any doubts about her telling the truth, as only locals like myself, who’re born here, pronounce the town’s name in exactly the same way, as she did.
Apart from the characteristics beyond the descriptive phonetics, which any local can feel, the first vowel (i) is a short close front unrounded vowel and the second (ö) is a long and an extremely open front rounded vowel and the intonation is on the first syllable. If you doubt what someone says about where he/she comes from, just listen to how he pronounces the name of his “home town” or ask him/her to write down how he/she believes it should be spoken, and then check it with locals if you’re not one yourself. Most of the times it works perfectly well.
England.America.Outer Mongolia. Sweden. It goes to show that hate and being irrational is universal and sadly human. A bit like tackiness.
DeleteI'm not sure many acknowledged that the remark was sarcastic and a sideswipe at all things media.It's little wonder Clarence winced. It's been his bread and butter for years.
DeleteVT
Anon 10 Nov 14.19
DeleteIt doesn't matter where you come from, from the USA or all the way to China, I think it's because people don't believe the McCanns' version of events. It has nothing to do with "hate", it has everything to do with reading the statements and believing in the dogs.
If that's too much for you, well that's your problem and to deal with it as you seem to want to, by belittling and insulting people. Why don't you take some time off from the forums and really look in to what the McCanns have told everyone about Madeleine's "disappearance". Perhaps something may "click" into your brain that things don't look as clear cut as they try to ram their version of events down people's throats.
'' I think it's because people don't believe the McCanns' version of events. It has nothing to do with "hate", it has everything to do with reading the statements and believing in the dogs.''
DeleteIs something untrue merely because you refuse to believe it ?The police have been in possession of the McCanns version of events and the dogs' findings longer than any of us have read about the event . What do they believe would you say ?
''If that's too much for you, well that's your problem and to deal with it as you seem to want to, by belittling and insulting people.''
If I point out flaws in theories and arguments and suggest they can't be advanced as truth and proof, I'm belittling nobody.I'm just highlighting something important.If you receive that as being belittled, that's for you to deal with.
''Why don't you take some time off from the forums and really look in to what the McCanns have told everyone about Madeleine's "disappearance". Perhaps something may "click" into your brain that things don't look as clear cut as they try to ram their version of events down people's throats.''
What's 'clicked' for me is that no evidence is leading exactly where no evidence leads - nowhere. Isn't what 'clicks' for investigating officers who are getting paid for 'clicks' more important than what clicks for me ? Your whole second paragraph could be addressed tp SY, OG and PJ. They seem to be deliberately 'belittling' everyone who knows the truth
VT
Anonymous10 November 2017 at 14:04
Delete''VT 8 Nov 23:03
Didn’t the police in Portugal make them suspects, didn’t they bring cadaver dogs to apartment 5A, the McCanns rented villa and to their hired car. Didn’t the Portuguese Supreme Court say after studying the POLICE FILES that they were right to make them suspects and they shouldn’t consider themselves cleared (or words to that effect) ………….You are a hoot with your “nothing has raised the suspicion among the police either”
Yes- all true. Then they were released without charge, never to be questioned again.Since then, not suspects.It's not me that's 'a hoot'. I didn't decide their official status, the UK and PJ did that.
''Websites are set up for new business all over the world every day so it can’t be that which raises your suspicions. Don’t take the readers here as fools by trying to lead them towards Murat and the Russian at the exclusion of the McCanns. ''
I agree.All i asked was what happened to the website and the business it was advertising . I'm not leading anyone anywhere. I have no whistle or dog. Where fools choose to go and what they do isn't really interesting to me. It's just a tad disillusioning that the herding instinct is still prevalent even online.Baa.
''You state about Murat “I'm not suggesting anything beyond an involvement at some stage” which suggests that you minimalizes his part in whatever went on. You do kinda give yourself away here as no part played in events that lead to the disappearance of a young child could be minimalized so what actually are you getting at here''
If I gave myself away, why are you asking me what I'm getting at.
''– Do these political figures include Gordon Brown''
To name one, yes.This was a police matter.Politics had no place in it.
Your final paragraph is speculation.
VT
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton10 November 2017 at 08:57
Delete''If you are quoting Andy Warhol there, it's actually 15 minutes,''
And that oddball nicked it anyway :-)
( that was todays trivia bite.You're all very welcome).
VT
VT 16 Nov 16.50
DeleteDon't forget the £millions the McCanns have never accounted for in their "transparent" accounts.
It could take years for the fraud squad to go through many offshore accounts (that's if they are actually being looked at). Don't forget that Capone was brought down by his tax evasion not any of the other "crimes" he was supposed to have committed.
Do you not see that calling me and my readers a 'herd' and saying Baa, is belittling ZT? Or is just a term of endearment?
DeleteYou assumption that people who don't believe the abduction story have got something wrong with them is also belittling ZT, yet you do it all the time.
The abduction story simply isn't believable ZT, and that has nothing to do with being part of a herd. We all have access to the facts of this case and we are all capable of independent thought.
Most of the readers here, have, like myself, examined this case from every angle, and that includes from the perspective of the parents and their abduction story. It just doesn't fit ZT. And it doesn't fit for the police either, or they would have let Gerry and Kate off the hook years ago. Are they all narcissists and mentally incompetent?
What an interesting concept Bjorn, and one I hadn't thought about before. You are right of course, and now you have pointed it out I see it everywhere! News reports being a good example, journalists rarely know the local pronunciation of the towns they report from! In Kent there is a Wrotham, pronounced 'Rootham' by the locals and 'Rotham' by people outside the area.
DeleteHi Ros!
DeleteSheep? Is that what I herd (lol)? What do ewe think of that?
Are we being lambasted?
Ok, the Mcs have fleeced the public for years.
Folk who flock here have noticed this. And it's not by shear chance (lol).
They can't pull the wool over our eyes.
Oh, before I go, I've bought you a sheep's head.
I've left the eyes in so it will see you through the week! Ha!
-
SixYearsInaComaMan
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton10 November 2017 at 17:57
Delete''You assumption that people who don't believe the abduction story have got something wrong with them is also belittling ZT, yet you do it all the time. ''
I don't.
''The abduction story simply isn't believable ZT, and that has nothing to do with being part of a herd. We all have access to the facts of this case and we are all capable of independent thought.''
Are you ? I'll take your word. You have to bear in mind, that the abductions complete lack of credibility ( according to you and the like minded) has failed to bring about an arrest of anyone in ten years. What does 'off the hook' mean in your mind ? If the police haven't let them off it due to the holes in the abduction theory-what's stopping them acting on it-any ideas ?
''Most of the readers here, have, like myself, examined this case from every angle, and that includes from the perspective of the parents and their abduction story. It just doesn't fit ZT. And it doesn't fit for the police either,''
So why haven't they done anything ? Online readers may think they've looked from every angle.Does that mean they've had as much information to examine from every angle as the police ? Don't forget, the police don't give everything away, it's a police investigation not a public inquiry. That's only happening online by thousands who aren't qualified to make judgements.
'' or they would have let Gerry and Kate off the hook years ago. Are they all narcissists and mentally incompetent?''
PJ / SY : '' The McCanns are not suspects'' ( paraphrasing). The internet : '' it's obvious they're guilty'' ( verbatum generally). I wouldn't know the mental competency of any of the police. Obviously it makes you wonder after ten barren years what goes on ( or doesn't). It would be easy and quick to say they're a bit slow witted.But,I don't believe every one of them could be.It's more a case of them following the directions that their superiors tell them to. Narcissism ? In what way would the failure or refusal to make an arrest of a suspect amount to that ? Why is 'narcissism' this years black for crime documentary buffs ?
VT
Anonymous10 November 2017 at 17:42
Delete''Don't forget the £millions the McCanns have never accounted for in their "transparent" accounts.''
There isn't a shred of evidence of fraud.It's a myth built by the same people who are frustrated that the McCanns aren't in prison.Unless you can show us all different of course.
'' Don't forget that Capone was brought down by his tax evasion not any of the other "crimes" he was supposed to have committed.''
There you go. The world knew Capone was a bit of a rogue. But his alibis always held water. he was paying the right policeman more money per week than the state was and improving their lot. He had run down neighbourhoods in his pocket by performing maintenance on their housing and opened soup kitchens for the starving that the state didn't, even though they were responsible.He never put a red cent in a bank as he knew they were criminals( the depression proved him right).In the end, they doctored his books and managed to jail him.All with no bank accounts to examine. Everyone knows he was behind bars for extortion and murder but no evidence existed that could stand up in court.So, if you're hoping that the same can be done to jail the McCanns, isn't that just a revenge fantasy ?
VT
To VT
DeleteYou said: "There isn't a shred of evidence of fraud"
So the Mcs were twice so 'unlucky' to have hired Metodo3 and Halligan? All crooks. And money laundering never occurred to you?
-
SixYearsInaComaMan
So your avoiding answering the question VT you said of Murat that's I,m not suggesting anything other than an involvement at some stage which appears to minimise his involvement in whatever event happened. In the event that a child was abducted from her bed how could Murat have played a minor part in it. Would acting as look out be considered minor, would transporting her in his car be considered minor ??????? Or is it an event other than the actual disappearance of the child your thinking he had some minor involvement in.
DeleteBTW my last paragraph is not speculation it's fact the only other person to be in apartment 5a when the child was alleged to have been abducted was one of the Tapas 7. It is also a fact that if I were innocent of any involvement I would suspect that person over a guy who lives down the street.
Who you'd suspect would be speculation.I answered your question.
DeleteVT
''So the Mcs were twice so 'unlucky' to have hired Metodo3 and Halligan? All crooks. And money laundering never occurred to you?''
DeleteNo. Employing people who turn out to be crooks is bad luck, not fraud. Bad luck isn't illegal. To look at those bare facts and then conclude it was a plan to scam and defraud is creative thinking with no basis in fact. To accuse someone of fraud or money laundering is defamation and slander. This isn't Portugal.
VT
VT, given, as soon as we heard they'd deployed Metodo3 we knew it was a scam, given they were business fraud investigators and had never undertaken a missing child case. You really think TPTB surrounding the Mcs didn't check them out, first?
DeleteThis is Tapas 9, not Famous Five. Unnecessary throw away slur on Portugal by you, noted.
Creative thinking? Creative accounting, more like.
-
SixYearsInaComaMan
I'll ask you once more VT and if I don't get an answer this time I'll put it down to you being a mouth piece who is quick to insult and redicule but not prepared to enter into serious discussion.
DeleteYou said of Murat I'm not suggesting anything other than involvement at some stage. That statement minimise his participation as some minor part. If you truly believe that there was an abduction of a young child from her bed what possible minor part could Murat have played
I should LAMBast you for that sheepish post SYIACM, it was shear nonsense! ;)
DeleteLOL!!
DeleteHi Ros! Like it!
Now and again, there arises an opportunity to touché humourously in an otherwise serious debate. It's another thing that makes here special.
Cosy on the tea pot, Peak Freams and Malted Milk bikkies, back copies of Reveille magazine, Housewife's Choice on the bakelite radio...
;-)
-
SixTY_YearsInaComaMan lol
Wasting hundreds of thousands of pounds on two fraudulent firms of detectives is a bit more than bad luck VT. Not only did they have mountains of cash, they also had the best advice available.
DeleteThey employed the best lawyers to defend them, but incompetent vagabonds to search for their daughter - how did that happen?
Bravo 14:04, for your interesting, nay, gripping, post! I found myself applauding several times :)
DeleteHow the parents have never suspected their friends is a mystery 14:04. I know I would have, no matter how close the friendship. Had I been in the McCanns situation I wouldn't have trusted anyone! Most child murders are committed by a) the parents b) people who know them. The Tapas group are quite firmly in b), and with the toing and froing that was going on between the bar and the apartment, they had the means and opportunity.
It has always troubled me that Gerry and Kate ruled their friends out so quickly. Obviously, they ruled out the staff at the crèche too, because the twins were back in the crèche the next day.
This is off the scale 'not normal'. Most of us would have been completely paranoid and would not let our remaining children out of our sight. And our immediate need would be to get them to a place of safety - ie. home. That they stayed on in that dangerous resort with those babies, for another 2 months is inexplicable.
Their blind faith in their friends should raise an eyebrow, so too, should their blind faith in each other. I mean didn't Gerry and Kate have even the teeniest argument about who's idea it was to leave the kids alone?
From the part of Kerry Needham's book I have seen, the Needham family were ripped apart by their tragedy, ie. they behaved exactly, as would be expected in the circumstances. I believe the wounds have now been healed, fortunately, and I wish them well. Kerry's account of the family's ordeal in the aftermath of her child's loss, is very real and so completely different to Kate's perfect family, who never had so much as a cross word. Not even when Gerry played tennis while others were searching for his daughter.
continues...
Coma Man
Delete'' Unnecessary throw away slur on Portugal by you, noted.''
Note what you like.
'' Unnecessary throw away slur on Portugal by you, noted.''
Pointing out that the laws that cover slander and defamation in Portugal are different to the same in the UK isn't a slur, it's a fact and relevant to the point discussed.
Ros
''Wasting hundreds of thousands of pounds on two fraudulent firms of detectives is a bit more than bad luck VT''
How is wasting hundreds of thousands of pounds a brilliant way of covertly making money ?
VT
Part II.
DeleteIt is strange how the rest of the tapas group have stayed out of the spotlight. Rarely are their actions on the night questioned. Russell was away from the table for a while, cleaning up his sick child and washing sheets. Matthew was checking on the McCann kids, but not really checking, because he didn't notice Madeleine's bed (the one nearest the door) was empty. And Jane Tanner was lurking along that stretch of the road, probably dressed in purple.
Dining at the Tapas Bar, is their collective alibi, the one they drew up on the night, on the page torn out of Maddie's colouring book. And that is what they have stuck with ever since.
Those first statements given to the police on 4th May, might just as well be etched in stone, they can never be erased. Actually, tell a lie, they can be, Gerry remembered he didn't enter the apartment with the key, he entered via the back doors that he and his wife left open.
Gerry, Kate and his friends are tied to those original statements. None of them can add any detail, or deviate from the plotline in any way without having a knock on effect on the statements of others. We should all be smacking our foreheads that it has taken this long to realise, none of them are co-operating with the police. And they are not even keeping up the pretence anymore.
Other than the parents, the tapas group are the obvious suspects. When Madeleine went missing, one or more of them were absent from the table. What were they REALLY up to? Why do Gerry and Kate take their word as gospel? Why was Kate relieved when Jane Tanner told her the next morning, she had seen a strange man walking off with a child that was probably Maddie. My first instinct would have been to deck her. At the very least she could have pointed the searchers in the right direction.
Where did I say covertly making money VT? Those are your words.
DeleteI actually think the McCanns are incredibly stupid with money, I wish I had bumped into them when I was selling double glazing. As the money poured in, up went their payroll.
Who knew the costs of losing a child would include a professional spokesman, PR Agencies, multiple firms of lawyers specialising in Company and Patent Law, Extradition, Libel (English and Portuguese), and, err, Criminal Law.
Then we get to the 'big boys' in the private detective world, not specialising in finding missing children, but, as it turned out, specialising in money laundering. Not once, did they do this, but twice VT, let that sink in.
A few years back, I can't remember exactly when, officers from Scotland Yard were seen carrying away boxes of documents from the former offices of Metodo 3. Supposedly, evidence of their Search for Madeleine, but what else did those boxes contain?
What were Met3 really doing for Gerry and Kate? Apart from dabbling in the Cipriano case and creating a Madeleine story with divers and a media circus around a lake? The Met3 spokesman was more of a spin doctor than a detective, with his 'home by Christmas' headlines.
In any event, all the McCanns dealings with Met3 are in the hands of Scotland Yard. The chances of finding a genuine lead among their files, are, and always slim to none. They were a bunch of shysters. The chances of finding further information on the McCanns however, are very high.
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/ASSORTED_SIGHTINGS_6.htm#jt1242
ReplyDelete"(Note : Here, is a handwritten entry of 7 lines, in the Portuguese Language, dated 23rd August 2007, which refers to a reported sighting of Madeleine, by a Mrs Jennifer CONROY at VARNA Airport, Bulgaria, on the 25th May 2007, together with a reference re Jane Tanner and Russell O'Brien. It also refers to a Daily Express article of the 22nd August 2008. Unfortunately, this entry has been placed diagonally across the page, and therefore obscures most of the left-hand side and central portion of the report)"
http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/ap/A6_5/apenso5_vol_6_p1242.jpg
?
Always a pleasure to see your cheery self SYIACM :)
DeleteIn the forums and facebook pages, any deviation from angry bitch face, would incur the wrath of all the other members shouting 'think of the children'. The memory of those places truly sends a shudder down my spine.... And also a wave of anger, I hate being censored, especially when it is a particularly witty line I have been working on! And I wasn't being censored for being rude, abusive, or libellous, I was being censored for holding a mirror up to them. Quite skilfully actually, which is probably why they hate me.
Ah, you have got to have a craic now and again SYIACM, the only problem I have, is with a few of my more priggish and po faced readers who feel I should be held accountable for my irreverence. In the dock no less!
Thank you for the smiles SYIACM, light relief is always appreciated :)
Hi Ros!
DeleteThanks for the ever warm welcome. We're adult enough to understand that any levity is never aimed at MBM, it's a response to the absurdities surrounding this case. Many groups have tried to embrace both "sides" of opinion and failed. So they end up entirely biased. No one wants a "I agree with that" chorus, day in day out kind of place.
I like the 'holding up the mirror'. You do that on CMOMM or MMM you are out on your rear! (It amuses me they still both have dedicated 'Cristobel' threads lol) When those ousted find here, they stay. You can be yourself here, pull a chair and share the tea and bikkies.
Meanwhile, everything Mc is ON the table. Posits, counter arguments, questions mulled over, theories exchanged, endorsed/refuted, explained, postulated.
If it's a pub it's a Free House. Maybe have a barney but all shake hands afterwards.
Here we can form a better informed opinion the way the discussion is allowed to flourish. For all the posturing of the other group admins they know no more than anyone else - they just think they do and are oft bombastic and boorish with it. All that does is lose them members, and no furthering to the truth of what went on "that week".
Not quite apposite but "many a true word said in jest" can set alarm bells ringing with others and set us all off on a new path of investigation.
So thanks for retaining the human touch, which we can all relate to.
Any Digestives? Choccy ones?
-
SixYearsInaComaMan?
In reply to VT 10 Nov 16:50h
ReplyDeleteThe only people who know the real truth are the Mc's and possibly the T7 in various degrees. In this case, truth is relative and those involved have chosen to pick various truths to suit when necessary. You don't need to be a detective to work out that the real truth has never been revealed.
Hi
ReplyDeleteIn The Sun recently. I cannot keep myself from commenting.
"Kate and and Gerry are “extremely thankful to both the Home Office and Scotland Yard for the continued funding,” their spokesman Clarence Mitchell said"
What about the Portuguese PJ, who allegedly have kept the case open since 2011/2013. Aren't they "extremely thankful"for that as well, or do they think that the PJ need no funding in their co-operation with their British partner?