Wednesday 15 November 2017

WHAT STOPPED THE ORIGINAL INVESTIGATION?

Last night I watched a very sad documentary about the murder of teenager Becky Watts, by her stepbrother and his girlfriend.

Initially 16 year old Becky was reported missing, and at 16 there was every chance that Becky could have been targeted by a predator online, but unlike the case of 3 year old Madeleine McCann, there was no intervention by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection agency. 

In fact, all the criticism that has been hurled at the Portuguese police for their handling of Madeleine's disappearance could apply to the British police searching for Becky.  The borders weren't closed, the crime scene wasn't sealed off, and a lot of evidence could be said to have been lost.

But there is no criticism, nor should there be, because kids go missing for all sorts of reasons, there is very rarely a need to call for an international search within the first few hours, if at all.  Most searches are concentrated on the area where the child disappeared, and for good reason.  Not only is stranger abduction 1 in a zillion rare, stealing a child to take out of the country is rarer still.  Other than in the case of Madeleine McCann, I have never heard of parents of a missing child taking their search global.  In the weeks following Madeleine's disappearance, they were travelling to Morocco and Europe, and Gerry even flew out to Washington.  I've never heard of parents of a missing child doing that either.

The parents of poor Becky, were not so proactive.  They were devastated.  They left the investigation to the police and they co-operated throughout.  They didn't have a spokesman, they didn't have teams of lawyers, and they didn't patent their daughter's name and open an online shop.  All of which the McCanns achieved within the first 3 weeks, roughly the same amount of time it took for Bristol police to arrest Becky's killers.

The behaviour of the McCanns, was seen as heroic by many, not only were they not going to give up on their daughter, but they were fighting for missing children everywhere.  The rest of us  (and the PJ) however, were saying WTF?
The favourite reprimand was, and probably still is, 'no-one knows how they would behave in such circumstances'.  Well yeh, actually we do, and it wouldn't be like that. 

Gerry and Kate are, as we know, mad as hell at the Portuguese police for not finding their missing daughter.  The original investigation is described in the British press as bungled and incompetent, a myth invented by Team McCann that took wings.  But did the PJ respond any differently to police the world over?  I'm going with No, because the majority of children are found within the first few hours and the tabloids would be spattered daily with pictures of kids who forgot what time it was. 

As for the crime scene.  When the first police arrived Gerry, Kate and their friends had already solved the mystery of Madeleine's disappearance.  She had been taken by a stranger abductor who was probably going to take her out of the country.  For them, there were no other options, and no optimistic ones either, because Kate wanted a priest. 

The father of Becky, wouldn't and couldn't, give up hope that she was still alive, like most of us, he envisaged scenarios where she would be rescued, accepting her death, devastated him.  Of course by the following day, Gerry and Kate found that 'hope', but they were still going with the worst thing that could possibly happen, abduction by a stranger, or worse, abduction by paedophiles or people traffickers.  No thoughts of finding her with a kindly neighbour, or sleeping under a bush, no grasping at straws that she might be close by.

I can only imagine the reaction of the first police who arrived at the scene, on being told a child had disappeared, how it happened (through the open window) and she had been taken by a stranger abductor.  Case solved.  'Now off you go and close the borders, we've got a press conference in the morning'.  It would be like a cardiac patient telling Gerry where the left ventricle is. 

The mystery of Becky's disappearance quickly unravelled after specialist police dogs discovered tiny traces of blood on the doorframe of Becky's bedroom, barely visible to the eye, someone had tried to clean up, but the dogs found it anyway.  Within days the killers were arrested.

In the case of Madeleine McCann, bringing in the specialist dogs also led to a change in direction of the police investigation and the even bigger thorn in the parents' side, the alerts of the blood and cadaver dogs.  They have, and probably always will, deny that the dogs alerted to anything - preferring to smear the dogs and their handler, rather than accept their expertise.  In any event, it brought the police search for a live Maddie to an end.  

No matter what Gerry, Kate and their supporters say about specialist police dogs, time and time again, their findings go on to be proved correct.  The McCanns argue 1) there was no blood, or 2) it wasn't Maddie's, 3) if Madeleine had an accident and bled in the apartment, why would that be their fault? 4) people on social media should not be allowed to use the word blood.  Amazingly, with the use of the repetitive chant 'there's no evidence', Gerry and Kate were able to convince a large section of society, that the biggest clue as to Madeleine's fate, those barking dogs, was meaningless.  That those experienced dogs, with 100% track records, were wrong on this occasion (11 times) is absurd, but that's how easy it is to sell a lie. 

More amazingly still, Gerry and Kate managed to convince (that same) large section of society, that they were the victims of an incompetent, third world police force, who were trying to blame them [the parents] so they could get back to their boozy 4 hour lunches.  I find it chilling, that Gerry and Kate were able to spread their hatred of the Portuguese police and Goncalo Amaral in particular, throughout the UK.  And the glee with which some presenters and journalists latched onto the McCanns' prejudice revealed much about their own characters. 

The killers of Becky Watts weren't very clever.  They didn't delete their texts, they didn't clean up properly, and they didn't write out timelines so their stories matched.  And I doubt they could afford expensive lawyers who would have told them to stop talking 

But, more importantly, the loving parents of Becky, didn't undermine the police by contacting the press and launching a publicity campaign. The idea I am sure, would have been hideous to them, as it would, to most parents who have lost a child. The thing is, no matter how hard you try, the actions of Madeleine's parents do not fall within the parameters of 'normal' behaviour, in fact, they were batshit crazy, or should that be crazy like a fox?  Taking the search away from PDL, was all part of the strategy.  So too, encouraging fruitloops worldwide to jam the police switchboards.  Confusion is good, said Gerry. 

So what put a halt to the original investigation into Madeleine's disappearance?  In the majority of unsolved crimes, when the dogs alert, the police are then on a home run.  In this case, the opposite happened, the investigation hit a brick wall.  The witnesses stopped co-operating with the police.  The case was shelved.

For Team McCann, Madeleine was again alive and findable, and anyone using the words, death, blood or dogs, would find themselves in the dock.  Those pesky dogs may have cost Gerry and Kate, the support of the Vatican and a few hundred thousand supporters, but they were able to restart the campaign, as victims, not only of an abductor, but of the Portuguese police and the British press.  I always wondered what they said to DCI Redwood or indeed any of the officers from Operation Grange, when asked about the dogs.  But, silly me, they were  never asked.  Not because OG are incompetent, but because the only witnesses who can solve this puzzle have been lawyered up since 2007.

When we look back on this case, and the looking back is not that far away, it will be in wonderment that a small group of people were able to create and perpetuate such an almighty whopper, it's almost as if Goebbels himself lent a helping hand.  Many will be squirming, and so they should be, perhaps asking themselves 'was I  a fool to believe two British suspects' over a foreign police force?'. 

Goncalo Amaral is right, at some point the world will know The Truth of the Lie, and that day is drawing nearer.  The recent revelation that the McCanns and the Tapas group have not given further statements to the British police is a game changer, they are clearly not co-operating with the police as we were led to believe. 

Looking at the speed with which the killers of Becky Watts were arrested, and the 10+ years that have passed since the disappearance of Madeleine, there is one element that stands out above all others.  That is, maybe parents of a missing child should not be encouraged and indeed funded, to create a travelling circus and sabotage a police investigation.  Most of course, have the dignity and good taste not to, and there is no need for legislation, this is a one off, lessons have been learned, we hope.  Most notably, the difference between a missing child investigation being solved within a month, or one that we are all supposed to call a mystery 10+ years later. 

141 comments:

  1. ''Initially 16 year old Becky was reported missing, and at 16 there was every chance that Becky could have been targeted by a predator online, but unlike the case of 3 year old Madeleine McCann, there was no intervention by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection agency. ''

    At 16, she wasn't considered to be a minor.Not a child.

    VT

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't know what point you're trying to make VT but anyone under 18 is considered to be a child?

      Delete
    2. Madeleine McCann was 3 years old. CEOP is about safety for children from 5 years old, and for young people aged 14+.

      Delete
    3. 6 October 2010

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1317962/Kate-Gerry-McCann-upset-child-protection-chief-Jim-Gambles-resignation.html

      Comments:

      "I can't imagine why the McCanns are upset over this - there's not one tiny shred of evidence that their child was taken by a paedophile, other than what they themselves insist."

      "'The search for our daughter Madeleine has been greatly enhanced by the work carried out by the team at Ceop'. strange to say the search has been enhanced when going on 4 years later no one knows anything of the whereabouts of this poor child. Ceop is about online exploitation and I dont think leaving a child to babysit her younger siblings and her subsequent disappearance was anything to do with online paedophiles. and here comes the usual daily mail censoring"

      "How has the search for Madeleine been `greatly enhanced` by the work of CEOP?? I always thought this organisation was set up to protect children from being exploited online? Madeleine was not exploited online, but is missing, yet on the CEOP website, Madeleine is the only child featured? Why?"

      "Nobody is betraying children, for heaven's sake. Why shouldn't CEOP work under NCA? Perhaps someone checked up on the CEOP and discovered its boss was abusing his power. It certainly looked as if he spent an inordinate amount of time protecting the Mccanns' reputation. Did he afford all missing children the same attention?"

      Delete
    4. ''I don't know what point you're trying to make VT but anyone under 18 is considered to be a child?''

      Not legally they aren't. Children can't apply for a driving license, get married, work full time or give consent. That changes at 16.

      VT

      Delete
    5. VT @13:45

      Blimey, I’m not a child then!

      T:)

      Delete
  2. ''As for the crime scene. When the first police arrived Gerry, Kate and their friends had already solved the mystery of Madeleine's disappearance. She had been taken by a stranger abductor who was probably going to take her out of the country. For them, there were no other options, and no optimistic ones either, because Kate wanted a priest. ''

    Not only had they written their joint timeline, printed off copies of Madeleine's photo before the police arrived, at approx Mr McCann was overheard, by one of the British searchers at 11pm approx. that she had been taken by predatory paedophiles. crime solved. Having closed down, the group saw no need to search through the night, or co-ordinate themselves so someone was available, but went to bed (ok may be they didn't sleep well)

    Equally in casting doubt over the police investigation, the McCanns also mention that they think the twins were drugged, really. Excuse me here they might be incompetent parents, but are they also incompetent doctors!

    Occasionally it's interesting to go back to the original files, particularly those from the LP thus written in English. And the number of times one or another of the T7 when asked a Q will say, something along the lines, it's in my statement and actually decline to commit to further information. Not going to be tripped up with conflicting information. Do I hear you say, what about the Rogatory interviews conducted by the LP with the PJ as observers. Well what about them, questions submitted in advance, allowed to confer and re-read previous statements. McCanns didn't directly participated, merely fielded their own Q's, which had the effect of dumbing down the original questions. The McCanns never participated and after they left Portugal they are never officially recorded.

    Time passes, but when you smell a rat, you smell a rat. This case has never hanged right, never did, never will.

    The biggest Q is WHY !

    ReplyDelete
  3. Your back VT perhaps you will answer my question about Murats involvement that you were spouting about in the last blog
    Just a reminder You said of Murat “I'm not suggesting anything other than involvement at some stage”. Presumably with that remark you don’t see Murat as the abductor so in a stranger adduction of a small child what possible stage could he have been involved in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I never left. Drop the attitude and up the thinking. I don't need any reminders from you or anybody else. If you can't read a simple post and put it together in your mind you shouldn't really be comment on a case that's remained unsolved for ten years and become complicated by design.

      VT

      Delete
  4. Well said. Another great article Rosalind. Keep it up!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you Ruth, there are so many different areas of discussion within this case, but for the biggest question, why has it taken so long, all the clues are at the beginning! :)

      Delete
  5. "it's almost as if Goebbels himself lent a helping hand"

    Not 'as if' (but it wasn't Goebbels, obviously).

    http://openaccess.city.ac.uk/1988/1/2012%20-%20TC%20-%20Madeleine%20McCann.pdf

    "Even though the Portuguese police had advised the McCanns and their friends not to involve the news media (McCann 2011: 78), Sky News, the BBC, GMTV and the Press
    Association were contacted in the early hours of 4 May and asked for help in what was defined as an abduction case."

    How? And Why? Who among the T9 had the PA on 'speed dial' I wonder?

    Anyway, you're on vacation in a Portuguese coastal resort, where you learn of a missing child locally, so you....contact various media centres in London ASAP - in case she should turn up, unannounced, somewhere in the UK?

    Not exactly the most worthwhile contingency plan.

    Meanwhile, a 'Foreign Office Spokesperson' told the Evening Standard:

    "Our people were rung up about it fairly quickly."

    And

    “A consular official is with the family.”

    A 'Foreign Office spokesperson' had earlier told the Telegraph that Consular assistance was being offered.

    Why was this 'Consular assistance' insufficient? Ambassadors are paid to liaise with representatives of foreign governments, not holiday makers. Yet Ambassador John Buck travelled all the way from Lisbon to pull rank on his Consular colleague, Bill Henderson based only minutes away.

    If it weren't for Brexit, the commons would be debating whether or not to hang a 'For Sale' sign on Westminster Bridge!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @10:34

      Important, perhaps crucial, questions.

      Thank you.

      Spade & Fork

      Delete
    2. How?And Why? Who among the T9 had the PA on`speed dial` I wonder?

      Wonder no more, Rachel Oldfield is the answer.

      Delete
    3. 12:33

      As far as the McCann case is concerned the time when someone in officialdom 'called a spade a fork & spade' is long overdue.

      Delete
    4. JJ 13:56

      Rachel Oldfield? A part answer at best.

      From her rogatory interview (Katherine = Kath Lansdale, wife of a BBC reporter)

      1578 'There's a total of nine contacts between yourself and Katherine's mobile one way or the other'.
      1578 'Between one forty two am on the fourth'.
      1578 'And twelve thirty nine pm on the fourth'.

      That could explain the BBC's awareness, but the net is altogether wider than that.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous 15 November 2017 at 16:11

      Indeed. Nicely put.

      Anonymous 15 November 2017 at 16:22

      Right again.

      Spade & Fork

      Delete
    6. It is a matter of public record within two hours of M reported missing on Thurs 3 May Rachael Oldfield was contacting the BBC and the BBC were in contact with Oldfield.
      All talk of Sky ITN the first to know is nonsense
      Check where HS John Reid was that election night its not difficult

      Delete
    7. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1550571/Three-year-old-feared-abducted-in-Portugal.html

      12:01AM BST 04 May 2007 [?]

      'The manager of the resort, John Hill said around 60 staff and guests at the complex had searched until 4.30am while local police notified border police, Spanish police and airports.'

      ...

      'He said there was no physical evidence that the girl had been abducted from the apartment while they ate at the tapas restaurant 200 yards away.

      “It’s still questionable as to whether it’s an abduction,” he said. “We are hoping that Madeleine is found as soon as possible and safe and well. Everybody here is just wishing that she is found as soon as possible.”'

      Delete
    8. ''Yet Ambassador John Buck travelled all the way from Lisbon to pull rank on his Consular colleague''

      The two most important words in the whole post : 'pull rank'. With your ''our people were rung up about it fairly quickly'' just behind it.

      Does any of that sound remotely like a police investigation ? Or does it sound like UK officials in as much a state of panic as the parents of the missing child. Panicking parents we understand and expect. Panicking politicians and officials ? I don't think so. Maybe in a threat to national security such as terrorism. But on hearing that two holidaymakers abroad had been the victims of a child abduction ? That was the quickest ' clean up and bury' operation of our time. A Westminster speciality .This was, is, and will always be, a political mystery, hence the absence of any progress whatsoever made by any police force. Politicians outrank the police. Political overkill has prevented an end to the case. No other hypothesis looks as probable if we're really being honest and objective.

      VT

      Delete
    9. VT 15.11, 23:38

      Yep.

      Some more now on the media issue (JJ 19:32, Anonymous 20:43).

      The Telegraph item quoted by Anon. from the link provided is NOT the first text to have appeared.

      The verbage we see now was used to over-write the original, a screen shot of which can be viewed here:

      http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/1may7/Telegraph_04_05_07.htm

      There are TWO elephants in the space given over to the initial text (three if you consider the time of publication to be veridical).

      The piece begins:

      "A three-year-old British girl has gone missing while on a family holiday in Portugal, the Foreign Office said today.

      "Portuguese police are investigating the disappearance from a holiday complex in Praia da Luz in the western Algarve."

      From a 'copy' standpoint, the opening sentence is redundant - except for identifying the author(s) up-front, i.e. the Foreign Office.

      Confirmation of the source can be heard in the SKY (Sunrise) News up-date @ 08:05 on the Friday morning, as read by Julie Etchingham. It is verbatim the announcement first published by the Telegraph on-line.

      The phrase - 'only to find...' - is a storybook cliché (with the accent on 'story')

      And so to timing...

      "Our people were rung up about it fairly quickly", said the FO.

      At 11:58 p.m. precisely they said in response to an earlier FOI request, the Foreign Office in London being alerted at around half-past midnight.

      Ultimately a great deal hangs on the timing of that first report by the Telegraph. Rumour has it the Telegraph made a mistake. The evidence from the Telegraph's own archives, for the time and since, would suggest otherwise.

      Delete
    10. Who made the call to the FO ? Is there ANY proof of A- the call did take place and B- the caller. I know the general consensus is that a McCann made it but is there any proof of that or just internet rumour. I'm skink this because under normal circumstances the call( as posted here) was far too early. It would ONLY be made if it was known for sure that no search was going to find the child. If that's the case it suggests two things to me ; very early involvement of officials and a ransom.

      VT

      Delete
    11. 22:12

      "Who made the call to the FO?"

      Well may you ask.

      According to the Police (http://library.college.police.uk/docs/npia/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf)

      Under sub-heading ‘The Initial Response’ (p.13):

      "The first report to a UK agency in relation to the McCann case was made on 3 May 2007, in a call to the FCO duty officer in Portugal from the operator of the holiday resort where the family were staying. The duty officer informed the FCO in London on the same day, by which time a member of the McCann family had also made contact with the FCO".

      Someone at the Ocean Club 'phoned the Consulate alright, but not at 11:58 p.m. The call was placed just after 2:00 in the afternoon! (see https://h42a.wordpress.com/2017/02/21/other-call-records-pt-3/)

      Delete
  6. I don’t know what stopped the original investigation, but I think someone had to ensure, at all costs, that the case would never come to trial.

    KM:

    “‘They’ve got nothing!’ he [Gerry McCann] fired at Carlos. He [GM] began pointing out the many flaws in the PJ’s ‘evidence’ and the complete absence of any logic. ‘This should be your job, not ours!’ he said. He asked Carlos whether he felt he was up to the job. Carlos thought so. Did he need assistance? Not at the moment, but he would if the case came to trial.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maybe if he'd taken some assistance he could rely on, arrests and charges would have came about first.Without those two nuggets a trial isn't likely.

      VT

      Delete
  7. VT / Anon 15 Nov 14.11

    Referring to Kate McCann's "Not at the moment, but he would if the case came to trial".

    I was watching an FBI programme a few nights ago where a couple tried to commit fraud by blowing their own house up with a rigged gas pipe, unfortunately it blew up half the neighbourhood and killed their next door neighbours. The boyfriend was hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt through gambling and living the high life.

    Anyway, to cut a long story short it took two years for the police to put the case together before it could be taken to court. The culprits had done a good job in covering their backsides but got too greedy, i.e. telling the detectives their was a Picasso painting in the blown up house when they had no paperwork or proof of payment for it, there was no furniture or photographs in the house showing that they knew the house was going to be destroyed, they'd upped their house insurance shortly before the blast, their pet cat and their daughter had been sent elsewhere while the culprits were supposed to have been at a casino gambling all weekend away from the house, however they were only seen in the bar having a drink not at any of the casino tables. They thought they were cleverer than the whole police force but came up stuck.

    It does take more than one person to put a case together, it can take hundreds of police officers/investigators a long time to fit all the pieces.

    The McCanns were playing a game, bullying the PJ, thinking they were back water idiots and they were superior being doctors, but you only have to look at the PJ files to see the amount of detail the PJ went into with everything, leaving no stone left unturned, to coin a phrase.

    A case has to be watertight to take it to court, whether it takes two years, five years or more to do that, we will have to wait and see.

    The couple who thought they'd got the better of the police ended up with life imprisonment for him and 20 to 50 years for her. She did a plea bargain so she wouldn't lose her daughter, but still got 20-50 years.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ''The culprits had done a good job in covering their backsides''

      But.....

      ''telling the detectives their was a Picasso painting in the blown up house when they had no paperwork or proof of payment for it, there was no furniture or photographs in the house showing that they knew the house was going to be destroyed, they'd upped their house insurance shortly before the blast, their pet cat and their daughter had been sent elsewhere ''

      The police didn't need to be rocket scientists there if we're honest.
      It's text book amateur criminality full of novice error.

      ''It does take more than one person to put a case together, it can take hundreds of police officers/investigators a long time to fit all the pieces''

      I agree - sometimes. Much depends on the nature of the crime and the skill of the criminal. The one you cited is easy . The McCann case is difficult due to the many magicians who are powerfully connected.

      ''The McCanns were playing a game, bullying the PJ, thinking they were back water idiots and they were superior being doctors''

      The McCanns were angry obviously. They, like all of us would, lashed out. I think we're all allowed that if our defenceless toddler has gone missing and nothing seems to be suggesting that she's going be found or returned. The backwater ( third world bla bla) was dramatic , tacky headlines dreamed up by tabloids who know people would revel in it. If there's any 'game', the rules are decided by the MSM. They still are and always will be. This was a hidden political incident that was converted into a mainstream gravy train. Don't expect that game to end.

      '' have to look at the PJ files to see the amount of detail the PJ went into with everything, leaving no stone left unturned, to coin a phrase.''

      I know, but they left the most important stone unturned. The answer was under that one. But who hid the stone from them ?

      ''A case has to be watertight to take it to court, whether it takes two years, five years or more to do that, we will have to wait and see''

      It doesn't need to be watertight every time.Big cases see juries take days or even weeks locked in a hotel trying to come to a decision. If concrete, indisputable evidence and forensics can be produced, they can't be defeated.Without those, circumstantial evidence has to be pretty strong to withstand a 'reasonable doubt' defence.


      ''The couple who thought they'd got the better of the police ended up with life imprisonment for him and 20 to 50 years for her. She did a plea bargain so she wouldn't lose her daughter, but still got 20-50 years.''

      Good, the crazy bastard. She has all that time now to study some decent crime books to see where she messed up :)

      VT

      Delete
  8. "As for the crime scene.  When the first police arrived Gerry, Kate and their friends had already solved the mystery of Madeleine's disappearance.  She had been taken by a stranger abductor who was probably going to take her out of the country."

    This is what leads some to believe that there was always going to be a false abduction, set up by UK agencies. Something happened to Madeleine that was not in the original scope so they went with what they could use of the original plan, albeit with a lot of mistakes.
    Once they set it in motion all those in the original scam were tied in to whatever the disaster was. They all tried to make it go away, but the dogs and peoples refusal to be hood-winked is a barrier to their attempts at closure.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Anon 15.06

    Your comments do stretch anyone's imagination quite a lot.

    If it was an abduction set up by UK agencies, I'm sure they would have done a better job.

    "but the dogs and peoples refusal to be hood-winked is a barrier to their attempts to closure".

    So you're saying that the dogs were just a charade, but you have no evidence and seem to be ignoring the fact that a 3 year old has disappeared and it has nothing to do with K & G McCann.

    I would suggest you read the 48 questions that Kate McCann refused to answer - one being:

    Is it true that you were thinking of giving Madeleine away to a family member (not the exact words but something along those lines).

    Do you think they made that statement up or maybe they contacted Social Services in the UK or someone gave them that information. How else would they know that?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. One of the questions Kate McCann was asked which she refused to answer.

      41. Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?

      Delete
    2. Anon 15 Nov 15.06

      re my post to you at 16.12

      I misread your comment regarding the dogs, many apologies for that.

      I go with your comment:

      "Once they set in motion all those in the original scam were tied in to whatever the original scam was. They all tried to make it go away, but the dogs and peoples refusal to be hood-winked is a barrier to their attempts at closure".

      Although your reference to a "false abduction set up by UK agencies" is still a bit "iffy" for me to believe.


      Delete
    3. The pj was hoping for a reaction based on KM's diary,,
      you know the one that the pj leaked to the Portuguese media, and the judge ordered to be destroyed.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous15 November 2017 at 17:2



      ''One of the questions Kate McCann was asked which she refused to answer.

      41. Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?''

      Possibly because it has no possible bearing on her child disappearing from the apartment in Portugal. The child they were supposed to be trying to find instead of asking questions that related to nothing.

      VT

      Delete
    5. @ 19:28

      A simple no would have sufficed.

      Delete
    6. The question was to establish motive

      Delete
    7. 'no comment' adds that smidgen of disgust.I think that was prevalent throughout that bizarre grilling. As for motive...If the remit was 'missing child presumed abducted' then the motive of an abductor is important, not the parent. That's where the investigation began to go wrong and lose time. Too many eggs in a ropey basket.

      VT

      Delete
    8. You seem to be doing a lot of agreeing with yourself there VT, but seriously? A 3 year old child was missing, Kate's 3 year old child, no question should have been off limits! Where are your priorities?

      You should also know, that in the majority of claimed child abductions, the parents are responsible. Ruling them out at the first interview to focus on a claimed 'abductor' would be downright incompetent.

      It's not a case of putting too many eggs in a ropey basket, it was a case of keeping all options open. Ruling out the parents in the first interview would be shutting one down.

      One of your more absurd posts methinks.

      Delete
    9. 'A false abduction set up by British Agencies' is more than a bit iffy, 18:18, it sounds like a pathetic attempt to shift the blame for Madeleine's disappearance on someone higher up the food chain than the McCanns. They are playing the victim card again, it wasn't us, it was someone else.

      Delete
    10. ''One of your more absurd posts methinks.''

      I know i wasn't supposed to laugh at that so I apologise.

      '' Kate's 3 year old child, no question should have been off limits! Where are your priorities?''

      My priorities would be to keep an open mind( including parental involvement). I'd be more concerned as a member of the PJ to concentrate on all activity in or around PDL. It was officially a reported abduction. Asking questions about the parents life in the UK in the past was pointless. If she had said yes, I'd been offered some respite from my daughter or similar, would that have led to ridiculous insinuations of maternal stress..leading to short temper..leading to( you know the rest). How about throwing in one or two questions within the 48 that asked about any other holiday makers or locals near the complex, tennis courts, or apartment that seemed to show up more than once, or seemed to be watching them or the children ?

      A good policemen would have kept all options open but focused on one immediate one. A poor one would jump to a conclusion with no visible evidence to support it, decide it was that 'gut instinct' and chase it and leave what should be the focus in the background. The first 48 hours are the most important. The first 6 are more so. If they yield nothing, there's time to focus on other areas.

      VT


      Delete
    11. VT at 01:40
      (“How about throwing in one or two questions within the 48 that asked about any other holiday makers or locals near the complex, tennis courts, or apartment that seemed to show up more than once, or seemed to be watching them or the children ?”)

      From Kate McCann’s statement, 4 May 2007:

      “Between the day of the arrival, April 28th, and the time that Madeleine's disappearance was discovered, the interviewee says that she noticed nothing unusual.”

      “She never noticed any strange behaviour during these recent days which could explain the disappearance. After having been shown the list of the Ocean Club's guests, she says she only knows the names of those of the group.”

      “She has nothing else to add. After having read the deed, she confirms it, ratifies it and signs it with the interpreter.”

      Delete
    12. Weren't we talking about the famous 48 no comments ?

      Delete
    13. Portugal launched the biggest missing child search in it's entire history VT, the PJ weren't just focusing on the parents.

      Delete
  10. "The mother of a vulnerable young woman who vanished from a seaside town eight days ago has said she believes the teenager is being held against her will.

    Natasha Pope, the mother of 19-year-old Gaia Pope, urged police and volunteers to keep searching for her daughter, who disappeared from Swanage in Dorset without the medication she needs to manage epilepsy.

    Two people known to Gaia – 19-year-old Nathan Elsey, an aspiring actor, and his 71-year-old grandmother Rosemary Dinch, who are both from Swanage – were arrested on suspicion of murder this week but released under investigation. Dinch is one of the last people known to have seen Gaia.

    Despite the arrests, Gaia’s relatives have said they still believe she will be found alive and the thought of seeing her smile again has kept them hoping.

    On Wednesday Natasha Pope, who is an actor, thanked the dozens of volunteers who were helping police and other agencies search for her daughter.

    “Deepest gratitude and thanks,” she wrote on Facebook. “Keep our heads and never give up. We all need Gaia back so she can follow through on her life plan. Society stands to gain massively by getting her back. Gaia is dynamic, fun, exceptionally intelligent, compassionate and loving. Gaia is special indeed, so we best crack on [and] discover the truth of things so we may bring her home very soon.”

    She added: “Backs of vans, in garages, somewhere she could be hidden against her will. In a house … keep looking, be bold with respect. Thank you. Keep senses sharp. HELP US BRING HER BACK! Can’t bear it.”

    A Find Gaia page on Facebook is being used to co-ordinate volunteers. A spreadsheet has been created listing nearly 70 locations including cliffs, woodland, nature reserves and beaches that needed to be checked.

    Volunteers have handed out flyers about Gaia’s disappearance to rail commuters, and almost £2,000 has been donated to a fundraising page set up to help raise cash for the voluntary effort."

    ReplyDelete
  11. @Unknown15 November 2017 at 16:25
    Hi

    Just as in the Madeleine case, those who were the last persons to have seen the missing person (Gaia Pope) alive should first of all be investigated, such as Nathan Elsey, 19 and his grandmother, pensioner Rosemary Dinch, 71.

    They may have something to do with Pope’s disappearance, but as the girl apparently suffers from severe epilepsy, there may not be any perpetrator at all. She's perhaps lying in coma in a remote place, without anyone noticing her. A complete stranger being involved is of course possible, but less likely than the two other alternatives.

    Unlike the Met/SY in the Madeleine case, who dismissed the involvement of the tapas 9 as well as the ”walking off on her own” scenario, the police detectives in the Pope case seem to focus on what they should, and I suppose that’s what you “unknown” want to emphasise! Thanks a lot.

    ReplyDelete
  12. VT @ 13:42 "drop the attitude" your having a laugh aren't you...... just answer the question. You tried to place suspicion on Robert Murat by saying he played some minor part in the events of May 2007. Your theory that you try to ram down people's throat is that it was a stranger abduction of a young child from her bed. What possible "minor" part could he have played. Since you are refusing to answer I'll help you. There are no minor parts to be played in the abduction of a child so either you are deliberately trying to cast suspicions on Murat with no reason or you know more than you are letting on to and you have good reason to divert attention to Murat.

    As far as you suggesting I shouldn't comment on the case on this blog.......thats rich coming from you who changed their name in order to comment after Ros barred you.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Well Ros - you post about a 16 yea old who disappeared in the UK to hammer the Mccanns again.

    Were you in double glazing mode when you wrote it?

    Quote to help you "I was selling double glazing".

    Have you sold second hand cars as well Ros?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, I did a post about a 16 year old who disappeared in the UK, to illustrate how quickly a crime like this can be solved when the parents co-operate with the police and don't turn the investigation into a publicity circus.

      As for your double glazing sneer, like many struggling single mums, I've had all sorts of jobs, most of which I can laugh about now, as I did in the last blog.

      But curious that you think yourself so superior to double glazing salesmen, particularly as the McCanns main benefactor and lender of private planes, is err, a double glazing salesman.

      Like it or not, the reason we are all here, ten years on, is because the proactive McCann family scuppered the original investigation. Not just with their failure to co-operate with the police, but with their very proactive campaign to get nutters and attention seekers worldwide jamming the police switchboards.

      Their war with the Portuguese police began the night Madeleine disappeared, already they putting out negative propaganda, 'no-one's helping us', they cried down the phone, while the police, resort staff and holiday makers were out searching. The first police who arrived, Tweedledum and Tweedledee, Kate calls them, unable to disguise her utter contempt for them.

      And thus their vindictive campaign against the PJ began, whispers to journalists, snidey comments that the detectives who were working 24/7 and sleeping on the office floor, were unkempt and taking too long for lunch. It was a malicious, vindictive campaign, it's sole purpose, to portray the PJ as bungling and incompetent. Now why would they want to do that?

      Blaming the Portuguese police for the loss of Madeleine, is one of, if not the, biggest lie in this case. It is jostling for first place with the archiving report cleared them.

      People want to know why 10+ years on this case still hasn't been solved 22:05, and they come to my blog to read not only my opinion, but the opinion of many others. We didn't make it a hot topic of conversation, the parents did.

      continues.......

      Delete
    2. I am getting the impression Gerry and Kate are now quite sensitive about their heroic, proactive behaviour following Madeleine's disappearance. They can't exactly say, we just did what any parent would do. All that fundraising and campaigning hasn't aged well. With the sunshine, scenic views and emotionally charged atmosphere, no-one was going to say to Kate 'Seriously? belt badges?'.

      Ten years on, all the Maddie paraphernalia, seems as bizarre as the parents behaviour. An online shop? The weirdest thing however, was how many people accepted without question that all of this was not only normal, but heroic! With their fundraising especially, they raised millions, for, err, themselves - which they have since squandered on a massive payroll and suing Goncalo Amaral. And if they believe Madeleine is still alive, why are they using the search fund to sue GA?

      The McCanns pull the victim card at every turn 22:05, nothing is ever their fault. And now they are trying to pull it here. But they are not victims, due to their own vanity, there are hundreds of videos online that reveal their true characters.

      While they were feted by the press and treated as heroes on the breakfast TV sofas, they were at their most vindictive. They were not only enjoying the power, they were relishing it and using it to clamp down on anyone who offended them.

      And that 'power' period went on for a long time. Since their huge libel awards in the UK, they still have the power to keep books the readers want, out of the book stores, and stories they don't like, out of the MSM. Not because they are nice, likeable people who deserve a break, but because they have the UK's top libel lawyers.

      I often have to remind myself of the way the McCanns behaved while they thought they were untouchable, how easy it was to lie and laugh, as I say, YouTube is filled with clips.

      It is hard not to feel sorry for them at the moment, but then I think of how they would be again if they had beaten Goncalo Amaral. Not only do they have a whopping legal bill in Lisbon, but people are now wondering how they were so easily taken in. Oh, and the closure of OG of course.

      Delete
    3. ''Blaming the Portuguese police for the loss of Madeleine, is one of, if not the, biggest lie in this case. It is jostling for first place with the archiving report cleared them. ''

      I thought you accused them of trying to misdirect people by claiming a childless couple was responsible.And later, someone with more sinister intentions. They blamed the police for the failure to find the child, not her disappearance.

      VT

      Delete
    4. @ VT 16 November 2017 at 01:29
      Hi
      "They blamed the police for the failure to find the child, not her disappearance"

      Not quite correct VT. They implicitly blamed the Portuguese people in general for not telling them that PDL was a place where paedophiles from all around the world gathered just to attack and offend as many British children they possibly could.

      Moreover,they are indirectly blaming those responsible for law and order for not telling them and other British tourists, that innocent children in PDL were constantly exposed to child taffickers, child rapists and all sorts child abusers.

      Had they just known about the lawless situation in PDL, they would have taken Madeleine's "crying story" seriously and perhaps even locked both doors to their apartment. So, of course, in the McCanns' opinion,apart from the "abductor" himself, the Portuguese PJ are to be blamed for what happened to Madeleine.

      Delete
  14. Anon 18:18,

    Thanks for the apologies, No worries. My sentences sometimes go on for too long.

    Regarding a "false abduction set up by UK agencies", many find this hard to believe that it could have been the case but there were so many pointers to some pre-planning that, for me at least, it makes more sense than that everything just happened like they did co-incidentally.
    My view has long been that there was some psy-op meant to take place but that foul play intervened first. By "occulting the cadaver" and calling the Thursday night abduction many of these originally involved could have played out their planned roles without being aware that a major crime had been committed. Guilt may be keeping these actors from coming forward, which probably plays into the guilty and the Governments obfuscation.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What do you suspect the long term objective of the psyop was ? If the UK were behind it, why would they choose another country ? If it was a psyop, how could it have gone wrong with MI orchestrating each detail ? Who are / were the 'agencies' ?

      It's an interesting area, but needs a bit more fleshing out.

      VT

      Delete
  15. JJ15 November 2017 at 19:32

    It is a matter of public record within two hours of M reported missing on Thurs 3 May Rachael Oldfield was contacting the BBC and the BBC were in contact with Oldfield.
    All talk of Sky ITN the first to know is nonsense
    Check where HS John Reid was that election night its not difficult
    ----------------------------------------

    And your point is?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A link to the appropriate 'public record' would be helpful JJ, since T9 accounts of personal contact with media acquaintances appear to have first emerged with the rogatory interviews, i.e. a year later.

      Delete
  16. So Ros - this is just a conspiracy theory blog.

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

    Now my opinion is that that should not have concluded the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine - just the investigation of the arguidos.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The investigation came to an end because they arguidos and their friends wouldn't return to PDL for a reconstruction. Nor would they answer any more questions, it would seem.

      You think the investigation should have just worked around them?

      Delete
    2. Which investigation came to an end ? It's still going on. If the parents were not suspects, nor their friends, that avenue was closed, not the investigation. Why do you think those two avenues are the only two to consider ? Why can't you accept the's far more to it. Doesn't the ten years taken give you a clue ?

      Delete
    3. The parents lost the opportunity to prove their innocence 01:24, they were still in the frame.

      Delete
    4. Innocent until proven guilty means innocence is already assumed. Guilt has to be found and then proven by the authorities.

      Delete
  18. "But, more importantly, the loving parents of Becky, didn't undermine the police by contacting the press and launching a publicity campaign"

    No the Police did it for them

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1162484/Emotional-appeal-missing-16-year-old-Rebecca-Watts.html

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The McCanns were specifically told by the police not to contact the press - hence my use of the word 'undermine'.

      Delete
  19. Hi Ros,
    Wonderful article again. You hit the nail on the head again, and comments great too.
    But just one thing, - is there any chance of eliminating VT from your Blog.
    His strange grammar (in case of a name switch) should be the ultimate clue to a shutdown.
    I seem to remember in one of his ramblings he claimed to be a psychiatrist or a psychologist.
    A malicious shrink with too much time on his hands might go a long way in explaining this person's joy in trying to upset dialogue on your site.
    Just a thought.
    jc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. He's no psychologist JC, lol. His world perspective is quite juvenile, and he is clueless as to human behaviour. Eg. Not believing abduction story = hate.

      I agree VT/Ziggy/Michael can indeed be tedious and his intention is of course, to disrupt, but I'm intrigued by the snippets he reveals, most of which, I am sure he is unaware of.

      I think Team McCann use my blog to try out ideas. At the moment for example, the little group who make up VT are floating the idea that Gerry and Kate were innocent pawns in some MI5/6 plot, forced against their will to go along with the cover up.

      It's weak, even by their standards - Gerry and Kate had a direct line to the British Prime Minister, ergo, the opportunity to mention they were being leant on, if indeed they were. They also had the world's press camped outside their holiday apartment, they weren't going to be mistreated by the police or bullied by the UK government to do anything they didn't want to do.

      I do see your point JC, I have cut him off before and would have no hesitation in doing the same again. His presence makes no difference to the numbers, and the atmosphere of the blog becomes more amiable, so you make a good point.

      It's my own curiosity I'm afraid, that keeps him here JC. My blog is the only platform Team McCann have to test their case on social media. Their own attempts at engaging with the public have been disastrous - the Myths sites especially, who's sinister and malicious agenda resulted in a woman's death.

      True, VT and his band of demons are not helping Gerry and Kate on the likeability front, but he does give an insight into Team McCann thinking.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous16 November 2017 at 03:56

      Dear jc

      Thank you for your post.

      “But just one thing, - is there any chance of eliminating VT from your Blog.”

      Vey iz mir! Here we go again, children. Knives or forks?

      “His strange grammar (in case of a name switch) should be the ultimate clue to a shutdown.
      I seem to remember in one of his ramblings he claimed to be a psychiatrist or a psychologist.”

      Wrong.

      “A malicious shrink with too much time on his hands might go a long way in explaining this person's joy in trying to upset dialogue on your site.”

      Difficult to decipher. Wrong in any case.

      Just a thought.

      And what an unpleasant thought it is indeed!

      I would like to suggest that you and I play a game of putting one’s money where one’s mouth is: we make a donation each to Rosalinda’s blog to indicate the strength of our conviction with regard to comrade VT’s presence on her blog.

      Please bear in mind that my overall impression of the Madeleine case is irreconcilable with that of VT’s.


      What is your opinion of my grammar, jc?

      Peace.

      T

      Delete
    3. Correction to my @10:51 post

      Just a thought.

      T

      Delete
    4. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton 16 November 2017 at 10:41

      “…VT/Ziggy/Michael…”

      Yes, dear, but who is Michael, princess? The archangel? Il Divino (the Florentine)?

      T:)

      Delete
    5. Anonymous16 November 2017 at 03:56

      ''His strange grammar (in case of a name switch) should be the ultimate clue to a shutdown.I seem to remember in one of his ramblings he claimed to be a psychiatrist or a psychologist.''

      You remember wrong. I hope your accusing somebody else of rambling was an attempt at irony. I've heard people ramble in their sleep and make more sense than you.

      ''A malicious shrink with too much time on his hands might go a long way in explaining this person's joy in trying to upset dialogue on your site''

      Or your memory loss. That would be a decent stating point. Google a few. Using phrases like the 'dialogue of your site'( It's Googles site by the way) or echoing ones such as 'the ideology' of the blog doesn't raise it's content or importance an inch. The ideology is basically ' let's see what we can find on the McCanns' and the dialogue is intended to carry that childish, narrow minded nonsense out.Just don't mention evidence.

      ''Just a thought.''

      Yes, but only just. Make your self comfortable, I'm sure another one will turn up soon.Hopefully it will make more sense than this mental hiccup.

      VT


      Delete
    6. ''Yes, dear, but who is Michael, princess? The archangel? Il Divino (the Florentine)?

      T:)''

      She'll think of someone, T. Give her time.

      VT

      Delete
    7. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton16 November 2017 at 10:41

      ''He's no psychologist JC, lol. His world perspective is quite juvenile, and he is clueless as to human behaviour. Eg. Not believing abduction story = hate.''

      A needless insult that means nothing more than you have yet more anger to vent. Shall we talk about : Two parents lose a child abroad = money launderers ?

      My world perspective is something you aren't equipped to understand. All the 'lols' in the world won't change that.

      ''I agree VT/Ziggy/Michael can indeed be tedious and his intention is of course, to disrupt, but I'm intrigued by the snippets he reveals, most of which, I am sure he is unaware of.''

      Michael ? Brilliant. Even though I said what my name is, your 'world perspective' can't accept it. I'm completely aware of what I reveal and i reveal it clearly.Your avid viewing of crime documentaries and quote- collecting might convince you that you have the magic to find hidden meanings, but everyone else calls that imagination.Your 'people watching' isn't studying psychology any more than viewing a cake makes you a baker.

      ''the little group who make up VT are floating the idea that Gerry and Kate were innocent pawns in some MI5/6 plot''

      Little group ? I can't decide whether i should feel sadness for your mind or laugh. I believe your idol, Amaral, has been 'floating the idea' of MI6 being responsible for the bigger part of protecting the McCanns. Him and his 'little group' that is. Don't tell me - he's part of 'Team McCann'- right ?

      ''I do see your point JC, I have cut him off before and would have no hesitation in doing the same again. His presence makes no difference to the numbers, and the atmosphere of the blog becomes more amiable, so you make a good point. ''

      My presence questions the logic of the blogs narrow minded 'ideology'. You pretend all views are welcome and up for discussion until someone who has an opposing view and asks you questions you avoid answering (for obvious reasons). You have loyal followers who comment-about 8 I think. You have loyal followers who are in the awkward position of not being able to bring my points down with a sensible counter and who have thought differently and beyond the same old song since i started posting.You think they read me and hate ? Or read me and think ? I'm a perfect opportunity for all of those who bang the anti-McCann drum. I give all of you endless chances to slam my ideas against a wall which would simultaneously strengthen your own ideas. But all i get are weak attempts trying to personally insult me. You're all strangers. Why bother ?

      ''True, VT and his band of demons are not helping Gerry and Kate on the likeability front, but he does give an insight into Team McCann thinking.''

      I never need a 'team' to help me think or to influence how i do it.. I'm capable of independent thinking and objectivity. Teams McCann /antis/pros are beneath me. I don't need ,or want to be, identified with any of these herds.A lot of people feel threatened when their little bubbles begin to tremble.So they lash out in panic.Their 'demons' take the wheel.

      VT

      Delete
    8. I'm not emotionally involved in all this VT, so no anger from me. As for two parents lose a child abroad = money launderers. That's just silly, two parents lose millions donated to them abroad = money laundering, would be more accurate. The money laundering suspicions don't stem from the McCanns losing a child, they stem from the unaccounted for millions that were donated to the Madeleine Fund.

      I'm not sure you are offering an alternate opinion, you are certainly offering, a nasty, malicious perspective of the world, that is reminiscent of the trolls in Stop the Myths. That is, you are hoping your antisocial behaviour will catch on, so this blog can be labelled yet another hate site.

      As for your final paragraph VT, am I supposed to feel threatened? Why would my bubbles begin to tremble? And why would I be lashing out in panic? You are projecting there VT, I'm not living under a police investigation, I haven't told lies that will catch up with me, I haven't done anything legally or morally wrong, my conscience is clear.

      Your fantasy of getting me in the dock, is just that, having an opinion is not a criminal offence.

      Delete
    9. Anonymous16 November 2017 at 10:51

      ''Please bear in mind that my overall impression of the Madeleine case is irreconcilable with that of VT’s.''

      Good eve, comrade T. Get you throwing your money around like a drunken sailor ( mine's a chilled bottle of Corona for when my central heating reaches tropical numbers about 8 pm).

      I enjoy your Bonzo Dog Doo Dah Band mind( RIP Viv). It's a welcome relief to read the meanderings of someone walking that tenuous tightrope between genius and insanity before any of us can truly distinguish one from the other.Respect.

      I have a favour to ask....

      Many a time you have asked me to provide a source or citation to certain points i make. I have tried to as often as possible providing I haven't missed the request. What I would like to know is where you stand on the whole McCann thing.You offer the occasional subtle hint but never elaborate.You question many things posted by myself and others, which is fine for a blog or forum. It makes for good debate.You say that your overall impression of the case is irreconcilable with mine. Mine isn't exactly carved in stone but is irreconcilable with the surface view that the parents 'did it' and everything and every penny spent since was to make sure two British doctors didn't suffer the indignity of being charged with murder and face prison, and all their friends who had no reason to take any risks gladly took major risks to make sure that aim was accomplished. Even politicians and military Intelligence seemed to be scared by this horrific prospect. So, I spread my net to catch more than two or nine fish and try to make sense of why so many wanted to put Humpty together again.So, T, how about you ? Your opinions and thoughts would be welcomed .

      VT

      Delete
    10. '' you are hoping your antisocial behaviour will catch on, so this blog can be labelled yet another hate site.''

      Can you offer an example or two of my anti social behaviour ? Or maybe my ' nasty, malicious, perspective on the world' ? I believe those adjectives have been used frequently to talk about you generally. Not by myself but other online dens for a few years. Why are you trying to paint this picture of me as being nasty and malicious. If you find my disagreeing with your feelings and thoughts about the case, or the innocent until proven guilty parents, nasty or malicious, you really need to qualify that as it just reads like anger or spite without it.I haven't called this a hate site. many have. I see a lot of things posted that don't hold back when it comes to labelling. They don't contain the word 'hate' but they amount to the same thing.

      ''Your fantasy of getting me in the dock, is just that, having an opinion is not a criminal offence.''

      Who said i had a fantasy or that i wanted to see you in a dock.In terms of any docks and in the context of this blog, the only people i want in a dock are the ones responsible fro Madeleine's fate. Journalists, bloggers, tweeters etc aren't important to that. It's two completely different games.The one that matters has no end.The other will fade into the distance if enough time is spent by those playing the first is taken doing nothing and going nowhere.

      VT

      PS..respect for you posting my earlier reply.

      Delete
    11. I'm guilty of many things VT, and not afraid to hold my hands up to them. Shocking people with my irreverence and off the wall views, is one of my life's greatest pleasures. Always has been, ever since I was 5 years old and going around with a mouse in my pocket.

      Nasty and malicious, no, lol, and nobody who knows me would ever say that. I am 'too soft' as my dear old dad used to say, to the point where it is debilitating.

      You have been around my blog long enough VT, to know that my approach to this case is as humane and compassionate as it is possible to be. But the people I am up against, aren't nice people VT, I am may be too soft, but I'm no door mat.

      I am treating discussion of this case with kid gloves VT, I'm holding back about 75% of what I could say, but I'm in no rush.

      You could not be more wrong about journalists, bloggers and tweeters, as batshit crazy as Trump is, he quickly sniffed out the power of twitter. For many people, myself included, it's the first place we go for the day's news. The honest journalists and bloggers are overtaking the mainstream.

      As for the tone of your diatribes, the rage seeps through VT. I'm not going to waste my time looking for examples, just know, I will not allow you to take my blog down to the level of those dens and pits. As for citing them as an example of my 'bad character', lol, seriously?

      Your final sentence is gibberish.

      Delete
    12. ''Shocking people with my irreverence and off the wall views, is one of my life's greatest pleasures. Always has been, ever since I was 5 years old and going around with a mouse in my pocket''

      Off the wall views ? Fair comment.

      ''Nasty and malicious, no, lol, and nobody who knows me would ever say that. I am 'too soft' as my dear old dad used to say, to the point where it is debilitating. ''

      There's a middle path. Take a breath, count to ten, take a dram. Either. It doesn't need to be a choice between nasty, unfounded sniping and too soft. It only takes a little consideration and self control.It's filed under tact and style.

      ''You have been around my blog long enough VT, to know that my approach to this case is as humane and compassionate as it is possible to be. But the people I am up against, aren't nice people VT''

      I haven't been around long enough to identify for myself who these people you often mention actually are . I see digs from you and the faithful aimed at the infamous Mr Bennett and his forum. But it comes across as though you are identifying anyone who holds a view opposite to yours , or different from it, as an 'enemy'.

      ''You could not be more wrong about journalists, bloggers and tweeters, as batshit crazy as Trump is, he quickly sniffed out the power of twitter. For many people, myself included, it's the first place we go for the day's news. The honest journalists and bloggers are overtaking the mainstream.''

      Trump's endorsement isn't impressive. The man's not playing with a full deck. Like many, he's found a platform that reaches millions.It's perfect for ego maniacs with little going on behind the eyes. I've been using alternative routes online for years without Twitter and it's ilk. I know who the real journalists and bloggers are.But, I was talking about the mass discussions /debates of all things McCann online. Nothing definitive has come from anywhere online beyond debates, lies and some fame-chasing lunatics.Why would that change now? You can't report something you don't know.Mainstream or Alt - the news isn't there.

      ''As for the tone of your diatribes, the rage seeps through VT. I'm not going to waste my time looking for examples, just know, I will not allow you to take my blog down to the level of those dens and pits''

      So, anyone claiming anything has to cite the source. You don't. I didn't expect you to. The rage, nastiness(etc) isn't there.You say it is for your own reasons. There's evidence all over the blog that I challenge hypotheses and theories that have no evidence.And there's evidence of me talking about alternative ideas as the 'standards' have gone nowhere and stayed still. Am I to take it that challenging unsupported hypotheses is seen as 'taking down' your blog to the level of 'dens and pits' ? The more discerning readers who visit here would hold the opposite view.

      ''Your final sentence is gibberish.''

      And the mouse in your pocket is a ghost now.Count to ten, twice.

      VT


      Delete
  20. KM

    “From the minute he got up the next morning [9 May 2007], Gerry was on a mission. Among the first people he spoke to was the ambassador, John Buck. The foreign secretary, Margaret Beckett, also happened to call him. He pleaded with them both to try to improve the way the investigation and the search were being handled. We needed it to be far better than this, he told them. They knew that, too, I’m sure."

    They knew that, too?

    ReplyDelete
  21. By the morning of 9th May, it sounds like Gerry was on a mission to prove the Portuguese investigation was incompetent. Of course, the case against the PJ began on the night of the 3rd, 'no-one is helping us'. These distraught parents were determined from the off to the blame the police.

    The investigation needed to be 'far better than this' Gerry told John Buck and Margaret Beckett, a strange thing for a victim of a crime to say, but understandable if that same victim were building a case of police incompetence for future use.

    'They knew that, too, I'm sure', is a disingenuous way of saying John Buck and Margaret Beckett agreed with Gerry and Kate, ie. the Portuguese police were incompetent, without actually saying it.

    Of course, by the 9th May, Gerry and Kate were surrounded by all their family, friends, lawyers and spin doctors. Although not physically searching for Madeleine, they were all working really hard around the pool and in the tennis courts. They were contacting large corporations, celebrities, VIPs, Sports stars, etc, and planning major fund raising events for the future.

    Perhaps Gerry was miffed because the Portuguese police never really got into the spirit of the Team McCann search and online shop. They probably didn't join in the tennis tournaments, or buy wristbands and t-shirts. And I doubt they were too concerned about Elton John being available for future concerts.

    You can see why the two investigations didn't get on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Speaking of ‘online shop’

      “And although I don’t doubt that many of them did genuinely want to help, it was a while before I realized that finding our child came some way down their list of priorities and learned the hard lesson that the media are not about spreading news but selling products.” - KM

      Has Kate finally read her own book?

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 16 November 2017 at 11:14

      Kate is a writer, not a reader…

      (After “Чукча не чиатель, чукча писатель.“)

      http://vseanekdoti.ru/natsionalnie/chukchi_01.htm

      T

      Delete
    3. привет T

      “Wanna hear a political joke?”
      “No. They might exile us.”

      NL

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 16 November 2017 at 13:08

      Привет в ответ, ’Красный бант в волосах’,

      Your perfume… Это Красная Москва?

      Часовой на часах (aka Т) :)

      Delete
    5. I am assuming the above is Russian - I do hope someone translates!

      Ah, you cannot be writer if you are not a reader 'T', or you can, but it really shows.

      Delete
    6. Princess is nice, but I'm more of an old Queen ;)

      Michael is the former head of Media Monitoring for Team McCann :)

      Delete
    7. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton16 November 2017 at 10:02

      ''The investigation needed to be 'far better than this' Gerry told John Buck and Margaret Beckett, a strange thing for a victim of a crime to say, but understandable if that same victim were building a case of police incompetence for future use.''

      Couldn't be because he was frustrated and angry ? If you reported a crime- a serious one- and it looked like it wasn't going to be solved by the police, how would you feel ? If it involved one of your children would you be calm and grateful ? If you were tearing your hair out, would it make sense if an 'observer' concluded that you were 'building a case' against the police.You defend the police blindly. Ironic when you consider that ten years has yielded zilch.

      ''Perhaps Gerry was miffed because the Portuguese police never really got into the spirit of the Team McCann search and online shop''

      Or had any suspects.Or found their child.

      ''You can see why the two investigations didn't get on.''

      Yet you won't hear of anything from anyone else who suggests that the PJ and SY have always been at odds in reality.One force with their hands tied and the other using misdirection as instructed by their superiors.There's no other sensible answer as to why ten years and large rewards on offer have thrown up nothing at all.

      VT

      Delete
    8. I'm referring to the very early days VT, the second investigation was being run by Team McCann - they were calling for photographs to be sent to CEOP and sightings of all small blonde girls reported to the PJ. As brother John McCann said, they were a very proactive family 'and if the police can work with us, that's fantastic', which was good of him.

      It wasn't another police force disrupting the original investigation VT, it was Team McCann.

      Delete
    9. I don't exile anyone from here NL, the borders are always open. It is the sanctuary city of blogs and forums, all are welcome :)

      Delete
  22. With all due disrespect Ros another blog full of codswallop. If you had any idea it would be perhaps a step in the right direction but as it is you fail to grasp any of the finer details behind Madeleine Mccanns abduction or of the massive strain her parents would be under especially when they had to answer to the Portuguese police who didn't even speak the lingo!

    Maybe if that lead man Amaral had decided to act promptly instead of gormandising then the child might have been stopped from being taken out along the Iberian Peninsula and perhaps into North Africa or beyond. Or maybe north out of Portugal and into the rest of continental Europe.

    This was not a local incident in UK. You need to remember that and as I recall there was never any ban on anybody speaking of blood, so why exaggerate? Any possible court cases pursued by the couple McCann were settled out of court in the case of the Express newspaper group etc because they knew they had libelled the couple with following the PJ leaked lies. Martin Brunt was caught out that way if you remember?

    Perhaps you refer to the man who banned you from his forum? Mr Anthony Bennett who broke a promise to the court that he would no longer harass the McCanns ad it was the breaking of said promise which found him in contempt of the court to his own costly disadvantage.

    You really do mislead your readers my dear. Try stepping into the McCanns shoes for a day, or have you? You alluded to knowing what it was like above so are we to assume you have lost a child in a similar situation?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow lol Pick the bones out of that one Ros

      Delete
    2. What an appalling way to open correspondence with someone you don't know. Not only does it demonstrate your appalling bad manners, it screams 'nae class'.

      I'm not bothered about the strain the parents were under, a 3 year old child was missing and their failure to co-operate was disrupting the search for her.

      Para 2. Maybe if Gerry, Kate and their friends hadn't been gormandising, leaving their babies and small children unattended, Madeleine wouldn't have gone missing.

      This wasn't a local incident in the UK, hmmm, it wasn't an international one either. The only ones claiming Madeleine was being taken out of the country were the McCanns. The police were doing what police the world over do when a child goes missing, they were searching the local area. As for the British libel awards, I'm sure the Express Group et al will remember those awards. But they haven't avoided trials altogether have they? How many times did they travel to Lisbon for their damages claim against Goncalo Amaral?

      Is the mention of Bennett supposed to frighten me? Unfortunately for you the problem you have there, is that I am not an idiot.

      No, I haven't lost a child in a similar situation, I would never have left my kids as the McCanns did. As for stepping in the McCanns shoes, I have many times, metaphorically, but it just doesn't work. My character is entirely different, I would have been grateful to the police, I would have been grateful to local people, and I wouldn't dream of pursuing a detective through the libel courts. I would have put the recovery of my child above my own personal feelings and answered every question thrown at me.

      I don't know what Kate and Gerry are trying to achieve, so trying to imagine myself in their shoes isn't easy. What is it they want? Obviously they want Maddie home, but let's take that out of the equation for a moment.

      I'm guessing they want an official declaration of their innocence, so they can get back to raising money and suing people. Or maybe they will return to campaigning against Freedom of Speech or for stricter rules at borders. Anything that will make large sections of society suffer because they couldn't be arsed to get a babysitter.

      To be honest, I wouldn't be in their shoes for all the tea in China. In trying to save their reputations, they have in fact destroyed them. They have spent the last few years learning the hard way, that they can't always get what they want. Not through the Courts and not by intimidating people on the internet.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous 16 November 2017 at 16:57

      “…you fail to grasp any of the finer details behind Madeleine Mccanns abduction or of the massive strain her parents would be under especially when they had to answer to the Portuguese police who didn't even speak the lingo!…”

      What are the finer details behind the alleged abduction please? “…would be…”? Is one to suppose that you “have lost a child in a similar situation” and have been questioned by “the Portuguese police who didn't even speak the lingo…”? “…the “lingo” being…? The Empire has long since gone. When in Portugal, etc… There’s Butlin’s, dear.

      Do you see what I’m getting at?

      Are you for real or taking the Michael, blissfully?

      “…the child might have been stopped from being taken out along the Iberian Peninsula…”

      Ah, you know that much… Good luck with your magical mystery tour.

      Thanks anyway: now I know that my grammar and punctuation are not the worst after all.

      T

      Delete
  23. Anonymous at 16:57

    "Any possible court cases pursued by the couple McCann were settled out of court..."

    20-02-2013

    http://www.theportugalnews.com/news/mccanns-and-amaral-fail-to-reach-settlement/27800

    "The defence team of Gonçalo Amaral told Lusa News Agency that court proceedings are back on track after the two parties failed to agree terms.
    Kate and Gerry McCann sued Amaral for 1.2 million euros in damages, and the case was put on hold due to an apparent attempt in January by the McCanns to reach an out-of-court settlement."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That was the downfall of the McCanns, they got too high and mighty and thought everyone would fall at their feet in fear of their high priced lawyers and the whole of the World loving them so much. Unfortunately they didn't reckon with Amaral's determination to get them to court and he refused to deal with them "out of court". Their shit and bluster did them no good and it made them look the cowards, the bullies they are and the contempt they have for the "ordinary" people who they thought would fall at their feet and believe every word they ever uttered.

      Amaral was the thorn in their side who wouldn't bow down to them and they couldn't accept that, being as they are "doctors, don't you know". How dare a lowly detective who's dealt with drug gangs, murderers, thieves, liars etc think he's any better than doctors.

      Oh dear, McCanns, you really got yourselves into a mess when you came up against Amaral and his hundreds of followers who found £50,000 to cover his court costs. Oh well, you live by the sword and die by the sword.

      Good luck with all the money you now have to find to cover your court costs and everything else you've put on hold you didn't have to pay for over the past 10 years unless of course some of your very rich friends will cough up for you, or have they all done a runner realising what a liability you both are.

      Delete
    2. Too high and mighty ? Yeah, suppose so. Don't you just hate those people who lose a child and strut about. But carry on making up some crimes you can accuse them of. Slander's the new rock and roll thanks to freedom of speech.I hope you felt the relief you were after by the time you finished that outburst.

      Delete
  24. @Anonymous16 November 2017 at 16:57
    Hi
    "Maybe if that lead man Amaral had decided to act promptly instead of gormandising then the child might have been stopped from being taken out along the Iberian Peninsula and perhaps into North Africa or beyond. Or maybe north out of Portugal and into the rest of continental Europe”

    I've no intention of being rude or "besserwisser", but facts are important to me.

    Is your belief or hypothesis about Madeleine being taken out of Portugal alive based upon some ”finer details”, which I don’t know anything about?

    You may have been fooled by Clarence Mitchell’s attempt to mislead the public by using some of the world wide sightings of Madeleine,all of which I suppose have now been rulled out, to make us believe that she’s been taken abroad and sold.

    One sighting that was used for this purpose concerned the Moroccan girl Bushra Binhisa, whose photo was blurred, making her look like Madeleine and another was the Greek-Bulgarian gypsy girl Maria, who was treated in a similar way.

    Mitchell has been using society’s (just not the British’s) general underlying fear and contempt of people, who are not like “ourselves” as a strategy to tell his lies,(it's often called racism) and the McCanns cannot possibly be unaware of that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ''Mitchell has been using society’s (just not the British’s) general underlying fear and contempt of people, who are not like “ourselves” as a strategy to tell his lies,(it's often called racism) and the McCanns cannot possibly be unaware of that.''

      Who says we have an underlying contempt or fear of people unlike ourselves ? You're implying that we're as racist as Mitchell and equally gullible enough to be taken in by his bullshit.You don't speak for everyone.

      Delete
    2. Well said Björn.

      http://travellerstimes.org.uk/News/Greek-Marias-adoptive-parents-cleared-of-kidnap-.aspx

      "In the UK, the press falsely linked Maria to the missing child Maddie McCann in what became a text book moral panic about Gypsy child stealing.

      After a blood and DNA test proved that Maria was a Roma child, the Greek and Bulgarian authorities tracked down her birth mother to Bulgaria.”

      Delete
  25. Hi Ros, First of all, I'd like to state that I am a great fan of your writing. I find it witty and entertaining and insightful; I also appreciate the fact that you allow my posts even though I don't agree with you. And I 100% accept your right to disagree with me.

    This is what I think made the McCann case so different from Becky's case in terms of "marketing" Madeleine. The McCanns are medicos and I am the only artistic person from a family of medicos - dating back to my great grand-parents. Both my parents are medical specialists, and I found them weird throughout my life, because they were so unlike me. Maybe they took the wrong baby home from hospital by mistake. You also think like an artist (because that's what you are), and these scientific people are very different from us. Many have stated that the McCanns were not searching for Madeleine, but this is what I believe: They were inside on their computers "researching". They were researching the statistics regarding missing children, and came across the American organisation named "The National Centre for missing and exploited children." They would have found this organisation through "Google Scholar" after a search which was something along the lines of "world's most expert organisation in missing children". That is what "The National Centre for missing and exploited children" is; it has done more research in this area than any other organisation in the world. It has carried out extensive statistical analysis regarding the processes that are most likely to result in finding missing children. One of its findings was that the more visual images that exist of missing children, the more likely that child is to be found. This was not the opinion of the Portuguese police, and of course, one can think of many reasons why revealing the face of the missing child through the media could result in that child's actual death. But, like good scientists, Kate and Gerry went with the science and the evidence of the statistical analysis. They then became as pro-active as they possibly could in making Madeleine's face appear in the media as much as was humanly possible. They also received offers from corporations and extremely wealthy individuals to aid this campaign, and although Kate McCann has expressed the "damned if you do, damned if you don't" feeling she had at the time, they went with the media, because that's what the science told them to do.

    It's probable that Becky's parents didn't have the same scientific education, and therefore crumbled into a heap, as most of us would do.

    These are just my opinions and since I wasn't there, I accept that I could be wrong. Maybe history will reveal that your theory was correct all along; if indeed history ever solves this crime at all.

    By the way - Stop referring to yourself as "old". 60 is the new 40 - Haven't you heard?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The other minor point you've overlooked is that Becky's next birthday would have been 17, whereas Madeleine was still 3 years old when she went missing. Would their helplessness and vulnerability be even similar ? Would the search strategy be similar ? Would images of Becky need to be plastered everywhere as she couldn't communicate ? Becky was on the cusp between teenager and woman, one wasn't even in infant school yet.

      VT

      Delete
    2. VT 12.14

      It doesn't matter what age you are, whether you're 17 or 3, people are vulnerable if they're taken by surprise by a monster who wants to do them harm and kill them. I visited some friends in the area where Becky went missing and it was heart breaking to see the posters stuck on trees asking for any information of her whereabouts. No she couldn't communicate because she'd been taken by a monster rapist who stopped her from communicating - didn't you read the news - he wrapped her body in an old carpet and put her into a canal. What a grotesque end to such a beautiful person. What help did she get from expensive lawyers, spin doctors, 24 hours non stop news, Martin Brunt hounding down anyone who didn't agree with her poor, misunderstood abductor.

      No she died completely alone, in a carpet, in a dark, wet canal.

      She may have been 17 on her next birthday but what has that got to do with Madeleine, who we only have her parents words that she was "abducted".

      Delete
    3. You are so nice about my writing, that I am loathe to disagree with you 01:20, but disagree I must.

      I do indeed understand your dissonance with your scientific parents, my own sons have no respect for the arts - we are all tree huggers, lol.

      I do however, understand that the group of doctors may have taken an scientific approach to the disaster and I think we all go straight to 'Google' these for the answer to, err, everything.

      Howevver, their approach wasn't scientific, because it lacked reason and logic. Madeleine was more likely to be in the immediate area, and the best thing they could have done, was get out and search for her.

      The idea that she was being taken out of the country was fanciful and the least likely scenario, yet they focused on this idea to the exclusion of all others.

      I can understand if the group had looked further into child abduction in the days following Madeleine's disappearance, but on the night, the immediate need was a local search. I'm afraid that's the part I struggle with.

      LOL, at your last line, I really must take it on board! Thank you for post 01:20, it was interesting.

      Delete
    4. re my post of 17 Nov 14.51

      I was getting confused with Becky Watts and Alice Gross who was killed in August 2014 who was put in a carpet and dumped in the Brent Canal in London.

      However, all these girls are vulnerable however they died, it doesn't matter whether they're 3 years old or 17/18 or older, they are all vulnerable, as they are all victims and powerless in the way they died. The only difference is that Madeleine's parents had high profile lawyers, politicians, multi millionaires speaking for them, whereas the parents of Becky Watts, Alice Gross, and adding on the parents of April Jones and others had sod all speaking for them. Where was Branson, Kennedy, Blair, Brown, Mitchell, and all the others speaking for them - nowhere, and why not????

      Delete
    5. @Anonymous17 November 2017 at 01:20
      The theme is "Medicos"
      Hi
      Your text was meant for Rosalinda, but I found it interesting, so here's a few words.

      When I, at the age of 20-22 studied at the university, before I dropped out, I associated with students, who were to become GP doctors or other professionals within the field of medical science.

      Most of them were of course nice people, far brighter than me and many of my other friends, but they related differently to life, in a similar way as you describe.

      Honestly, I never quite got to understand them and I couldn’t imagine any of them becoming poets later in life, and no-one, as far as I know, has yet made any attempt in such a direction.

      As for the McCanns, their strange behaviour, should of course be assessed and understood in the light of their professions and their psychological qualities (narcissistic personalities in my opinion), and all of their queer statements, comments, decisions are not evidence of their guilt.

      In short, here’s what I’ve learnt in life and from life, in my own words;

      A purely scientific approach to reality is only possible in the absence of a normal emotional life.

      Delete
    6. Anonymous17 November 2017 at 16:48

      ''it doesn't matter whether they're 3 years old or 17/18 or older, they are all vulnerable, as they are all victims and powerless in the way they die''

      In that's case ,every victim of a violent crime is too, regardless of age. I'd rather be 17 than 3 if i was snatched. My point being obvious.

      '' The only difference is that Madeleine's parents had high profile lawyers,''

      That would only have relevance if there was a ransom. There wasn't one.Or, as far as we know there wasn't. That might of been lost in the wash too...


      ''Where was Branson, Kennedy, Blair, Brown, Mitchell, and all the others speaking for them - nowhere, and why not???''

      Good question.It makes you wonder why they had such a vested interest in the McCann case which also had a conspicuous involvement and close interest in what happened in PDL. And, of course, and as mentioned elsewhere on this thread, ' diplomatic sensitivities'. The others you refer too were merely nasty domestic crimes for the police to get into. No politics were involved. No leverage was being used.Nobody other than Joe Public or his wife would ever be suspected. That couldn't have been the case in Portugal though could it.

      VT

      Delete
    7. Björn17 November 2017 at 17:24

      ''A purely scientific approach to reality is only possible in the absence of a normal emotional life.''

      Picture the speedometer on the dashboard. The needles near the middle.That's were we all are more or less.To the left is analytical, to the right, emotional.From the middle we have easy access to a degree of either.To be either end leaves you with little hope of using both.In the west we need both.We live in a left brain culture. But trying to put your right foot into your left shoe results in dissatisfaction .

      You might get some fun if you find some Roger Sperry split brain studies from the 80s. Caltech. I know I did.

      VT

      Delete
    8. @ VT 17 November 2017 at 20:04
      Hi VT
      Our western "civilised" culture is based more on logical thinking than on emotional reasoning,but people in common, as you imply, but obviously not the McCanns, can understand and approach the world from both perspectives, thanks to the interaction between the left and the right parts of our brains.

      Interesting, though I haven't read so much about how it works in a bio-physical way.

      Delete
  26. Anonymous at 01:20

    “Highly respected forensic psychologist Dr Joe Sullivan arrived in Praia da Luz within days of Madeleine's disappearance as part of a so-called 'Cracker' team, with Detective Chief Superintendent Graham Hill. He returned to the UK on 09 May 2007.”

    http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/Nigel/id354.htm


    May 9, 2007

    “Last night John Buck, the British Ambassador to Portugal, confirmed that British experts had arrived in addition to the three family liaison officers from Leicestershire Police.”


    15 May 2007

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-454949/At-home-abroad-team-Madeleine.html

    “The McCanns have instructed the International Family Law Group, specialist London lawyers in child abduction and international family law, together with barrister Michael Nicholls QC, to help them in the search for Madeleine.

    Mr McCann said the arrival of lawyers from the firm in Praia da Luz had meant 'a burden being lifted from our shoulders' and the law group says members of the public will soon be able to make their own financial contribution to a 'fighting fund' for the search, which could pay for private detectives across Europe.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Det Supt Graham Hill and psychologist Dr Joe Sullivan arrived in Praia da Luz within 48 hours of Madeleine's disappearance.

      http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/48april11/SKY_20_04_2011.htm

      "The first UK specialists parachuted in to help Portuguese police find Madeleine McCann have left their jobs.

      Det Supt Graham Hill and psychologist Dr Joe Sullivan helped the investigators narrow down a list of potential suspects and offered interview techniques.

      They arrived in Praia da Luz within 48 hours of Madeleine's disappearance nearly four years ago, but diplomatic sensitivities delayed confirmation of their presence for several days.

      They and colleagues later advised Leicestershire police who pursued British leads in the hunt for Madeleine.

      The two men led the Behavioural Analysis Unit at the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre and are the latest in a small exodus of its staff."

      Delete
    2. Anon 17 Nov 12.39

      "The first UK specialists parachuted in to help Portuguese police find Madeleine McCann had left their jobs".

      It does make one wonder if the "Way back machine" was right when it said that CEOP was involved on Monday 30th April when they posted that Madeleine had gone missing, which many people want to dismiss as nonsense.

      Who else would leave their jobs within two days of learning that a child had gone missing, who could have been found the next day or the next week or the next month!!! If they knew from Monday 30th April they would have had more knowledge of what was required of them up to the "big day" on Thurs 3rd May and their involvement the following weekend, giving themselves 5 or 6 days to sort their jobs/stories/lives out.

      CEOP and JG have a lot to answer for including 2,345 British child abuse suspects, which don't seem to have come to any conclusion. It's on Wiki if you search for CEOP.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous at 15:51

      http://www.gerrymccannsblogs.co.uk/press/48april11/SKY_20_04_2011.htm

      Leaving their jobs was printed in an article dated 20 April 2011.

      The interesting part (in my view):

      "They arrived in Praia da Luz within 48 hours of Madeleine's disappearance nearly four years ago, but diplomatic sensitivities delayed confirmation of their presence for several days."

      Delete
    4. 15:51

      "It does make one wonder if the "Way back machine" was right when it said that CEOP was involved on Monday 30th April when they posted that Madeleine had gone missing, which many people want to dismiss as nonsense."

      'Many people' had a vested interest in requiring the WBM's administrators to remove that 30th April record, among them, quite possibly, whoever achieved an equivalent 'correction' on the part of the Telegraph (see up-thread, 12:44 today).

      If you factor in SKY's so-called 'live' report at 8:30 a.m. on the Friday, which was indisputably edited beforehand, then one has to wonder quite what was going on.

      Surely these various media organizations were not all employing error-prone graduate trainees? Even Kate McCann understands that three coincidences is at least one too many.

      Delete
    5. @
      Anonymous17 November 2017 at 16:48

      ''The interesting part (in my view):

      "They arrived in Praia da Luz within 48 hours of Madeleine's disappearance nearly four years ago, but diplomatic sensitivities delayed confirmation of their presence for several days."

      It goes to show, we don't always need a full plate to plough through to find something worth the dig ;''little fishes are sweet'', as the saying goes.

      I wonder what the vague 'diplomatic sensitivities' is masking. A bit odd for a 'police investigation' I'd say...

      VT

      Delete
    6. There's been a trend for a few years now if someone is convinced of something they can't prove.They claim it 'was' on the WBM. it's the net equivalent of an urban myth.I know the WBm can be edited or wipe things.But people can cache information on their own computer too.So, if there's evidence of 'many people' ( names?) or what was supposedly on the WBM will we ever be treated to a viewing of it ?

      Delete
    7. 20:56

      The Wayback party's been and gone. You'll find plenty to see and commentary by many 'names' on either side of the argument if you take the trouble to look for it.

      Delete
    8. Anon 17 November 16.48

      It would have been interesting to see what the reaction would have been if these two people had turned up at the Ocean Club after leaving their jobs only to be told "you can go back home now, Madeleine's been found".

      Oops, how would that have gone down, oh dear, we've just given our jobs up, we've got no money and no jobs, what are we going to do??

      So, obviously, it seemed that they knew Madeleine wasn't going to be found anytime soon otherwise these two would've looked liked right prats, sitting twiddling their fingers waiting for a flight home and no jobs to go back to.

      John McCann, Gerry McCann's brother, also gave up his job with a pharmaceutical company to be a director of the "Fund", another one who obviously had been looking into a crystal ball to see that Madeleine wasn't coming back any time soon.

      Delete
    9. Anon 15:12

      As I understand it, Det Supt Graham Hill and psychologist Dr Joe Sullivan left their jobs in April 2011.

      I agree with your last paragraph.

      Delete
    10. I don't give any credence to the wayback machine, a lot of people have a lot of reasons to throw a lot of mud at this 'mystery'. The more complicated it becomes and the more people it involves - all the better for the original perpetrators. Confusion is good.

      As for DS Graham Hill and psychologist Dr. Joe Sullivan of CEOP arriving within 48 hours, err, ok, but the idea that they 'helped investigators narrow down a list of suspects, and advised them on interviewing techniques' is however absurd, and very patronising to the Portuguese police.

      These two may have been experts in their field, but they were strangers in PDL, who didn't know the area and err, didn't speak the language! Imagine a major crime in a British seaside town, and two Portuguese experts arriving (uninvited) to direct the local force.

      Continuing with that thought, imagine if said crime involved a Portuguese family, and the Portuguese government sent their own police and their own experts to divert the investigation away from their own citizens?

      Whilst I agree, arguments can be made that it was all pre-planned, I'm still not buying it. KISS, Keep It Simple Stupid. Governments and secret agents don't conspire to kill a 3 year old on her holidays.

      The networking Tapas group had phones full of useful connections. Their pleas were answered in shedloads - by the evening of 4th May, the world's media were camped outside their apartments, and the British government had charged in to their rescue.

      It was a time for opportunists, most of whom who were on the first planes out to PDL. The stricken parents had caused a media sensation, a beautiful tiny child was missing rather than the usual spotty oik, and there was much money to be made from the tragedy.

      And Clarence, bless him, has a penchant for tragedy, some might even call him an ambulance chaser. Clarence, like Jim, and Gerry, is everyone's old authoritative headmaster, the angry face looking for an excuse to get his cane out.

      Clarence has a gift for making whatever bullshit comes out of his mouth, sound official. He speaks on behalf of people who are too important to speak to the rabble themselves. His fantasies probably include standing at the Whitehouse Podium, but with prepared questions.

      Continues, Clarence deserves so much more........

      Delete
    11. Actually, I'm going to make it a blog :)

      Delete
  27. @Anonymous17 November 2017 at 00:17
    Hi
    I'm awfully sorry. I was just talking about prejudice that people in general hold against others, whose culture they don't understand.

    What I meant was, that Mitchell is well aware of the underlying structure of racism, which exists in all societies, and uses it in order to manipulate, especially, the British MSM readers/viewers but also people of other nationalities, like myself.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Björn17 November 2017 at 10:46

      simple then Björn - quote some examples from Mitchell for us to examine.

      Delete
    2. @Anonymous17 November 2017 at 20:51
      Hi
      "quote some examples from Mitchell for us to examine".
      There's no need for that "Anon". Help me instead to find something,which Mitchell has said as the McCanns' spokesman, that does not sound like faked honesty. Even Donald Trump is more convincing in his rhetoric than CM, I'd say.

      Delete
    3. Clarence Mitchell seems to think he knows the Portuguese.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzikQRswVpw

      2:18

      “cultural differences. ..why do these crazy Brits want to put their children to bed at 7:30 at night? They should be out with us at the table, having wine till midnight. That’s just, that’s just how it is.”

      This is the same Clarence Mitchell who said that media coverage in the wake of Madeleine’s disappearance was a “spin cycle of lunacy”. Who am I to disagree?

      Delete
    4. @Anonymous18 November 2017 at 13:41
      Hi
      In the YouTube-clip you refer to CM really shows his qualities as a professional liar beyond compare.

      CM tries to make us believe that Portuguese parents are irresponsible, when they’re keeping their families together, while sometimes dining out late in the evening.

      As for your quote of his speech, he knows as well as anyone that children are much better off being with their parents, than being alone in a dark room in a strange place, unless they’d be at risk of being talked about as sexual objects, as Madeleine was on a holiday prior to the McCanns’ holiday in PDL, according to the Gaspar statements.


      Delete
    5. ''unless they’d be at risk of being talked about as sexual objects, as Madeleine was on a holiday prior to the McCanns’ holiday in PDL, according to the Gaspar statements.''

      Can you extract the part of the statements that definitively state that Madeleine was being talked about in this way.Or did Gaspar merely hear a lewd suggestion and see a lewd gesture and then add to it. Did Gaspar say at all that Payne, or Gerry M, referred to Madeleine at all in that exchange. or did she, in retrospect, 'assume' they 'must have been talking about Madeleine' ?

      VT

      Delete
    6. @Anonymous18 November 2017 at 13:41

      It hasn't helped the parents to have CM in their corenr one bit really. Lying is a huge industry. The two biggest manufacturers are Westminster and their propaganda arm, the MSM. It's difficult to think of anyone who can boast a highly successful track record working fo the MSM and BOTH of the two main UK political parties. It's impossible to find anyone who has been able to swap hats so often without it being questioned.Maybe the McCanns were guilty of amaking a decision under duress due to the trauma od losing their child. I wouldn't know.His impressive CV could may have tipped the balance.But, when i see him speaking like this and with so much contrived certainty and conviction it occurs to me that he had no proof whatsoever that the McCanns had no involvement. He's a media monitor-cum-MP, not a detective. Where then, does that certainty come from if it's such a-as he says- mystery.Who has given him a gilt edged guarantee that the McCanns were not involved and that he wouldn't be risking public humiliation and career suicide by promoting something that could one day blow up in his face ? Any ideas ? But, back to the vid...

      I have an alarm that goes off in my head when Oprah is mentioned.True, that 'schmaltzy'' chat style grates and it doesn't help. But, the billionaire actress( tell me 2 or more of her films without googling ) and God knows what else, has been the go-to woman for too many politicians under fire and in need of some fake PR. I'll mention no names. Barrack Obama. She's provided a platform for too many dodgy dealers.Yes, I'm aware of her online 'predator watch' so she gets a tick for that. But I know of Esther Rantzens childline and BBC career that ran in tandem for so many years. I don't believe America was the place to take the roadshow. The crime occurred in Europe. The sightings(cough) occurred all over the globe-except America.

      When Clarence mentions, deliberately in passing, Amaral's book, he states that Amaral claims that the parents 'know what happened'. It was those thee words that set off my 'spidey senses'. It suggests all kinds to me. The parents do know don't they ? There was an abduction. The tone, and his manner, when talking about this,suggests to me that Mitchell knows what happened but neither Amaral or the parents do.He can swagger on that stage with confidence because if they don't, and we don't, nobody outside of the criminal/s circle does. And they have no need or desire to share that with us. Only one going rogue will and he'll have to have a deathwish to do it.

      VT

      Delete
  28. Anon @ 16:48.

    Google NPIA,Operation Task,it concerns the involvement of Leicestershire police.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And JJ was right, therefore, about CEOP being in attendance post haste.

      Amaral invited a Criminal analyst from the UK, and suggested CEOP reps. might wish to attend, in a communication dated 7 May (http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JEREMY-WILKINS.htm#p2p510).

      But Det. Supt Graham Hill and psychologist Dr Joe Sullivan were both CEOP staff at the time - Wolves in sheep's clothing?

      Delete
    2. http://library.college.police.uk/docs/npia/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf

      "As no request had been received from the Portuguese police, the force contacted the FCO and through them offered the services of the FLOs and the incident room to the Portuguese authorities. This led to a request by email from the Portuguese police on Friday, 4 May for the deployment of officers to support the family in Portugal. This was quickly followed by section 26 Police Act approval from the Secretary of State and the officers were deployed the following day, which was the Saturday of a bank holiday weekend."

      Delete
    3. 20:38

      A letter was addressed to Chiefs of Police, on behalf of the Home Office, ACPO, and the Association of Police Authorities, dated May 2006, in which it was stated:

      “It follows from the above that forces should not initiate....requests for assistance from overseas agencies”

      'The Force' should've gone to Specsavers then, since they either did not read or deliberately ignored this earlier directive.

      Delete
    4. Was it a force that requested the assistance though, or a different office.Would the PJ really panic and call for help so soon ? I have doubts.

      VT

      Delete
    5. @ VT18 November 2017 at 23:38
      Hi VT
      "Can you extract the part of the statements that definitively state that Madeleine was being talked about in this way"
      Yes, I can, though I haven't the PJ-files in front of my eyes. Dave Payne, if I'm not mistaken, explicitly asks Gerry if Madeleine does this, and then he makes an odd gesture, that may have something to do with sexuality. It's obvious to me that Madeleine is being talked about, but not quite so obvious that it has to do with her sexuality, but yet very likely so.

      Delete
    6. I wouldn’t rush to conclusions. The Gaspar statements are vague. Whether or not Payne was referring to Madeleine it is unclear. As Madeleine was nearly two and a half year old in September 2005, I assume she could overhear the conversation ("Madeleine's err, you know, was a very bright child"... – DP, 11 April 2008). Did Payne take that into consideration, or was Madeleine not that bright after all.

      NL

      Delete
    7. Hi NL
      I actually don't think that paedophilia has anything to do with the Madeleine case, but I do believe that the Paynes and the McCanns were rather immature and childish in their way to associate with one another and may perhaps have been talking about things they shouldn't do in the presence of their children. Paedophilia was, however, invented by the McCanns to make an abduction by a sexbeast seem possible or likely.

      Delete
    8. Bjorn

      It makes no difference if you think paedophillia has anything to do with the case. You could be completely right o completely wrong. Guesses are only guesses until evidence turns up.


      ''I do believe that the Paynes and the McCanns were rather immature and childish in their way to associate with one another and may perhaps have been talking about things they shouldn't do in the presence of their children. ''

      You don't know how that went. Nobody but the people you refer to know it.If you're indirectly referring to the night that the Gaspar statement talks about, it involved the parents and friends and a few drinks. The conversation and gestures referred to mentioned no name and no mention of Gerry McCanns reaction or reply. You may not have the statement in front of your eyes but, when you have a look into the famous PJ files, you still won't see it. It isn't there. The conversation and gesture as I read them, could have been referring to somebody Payne and GM both knew from their past.It could have been a girl, a student, a nurse-anyone. There was no name. But no name has led you and thousands to insert Madeleine's name. How realistic would it have been- even if we suspend our common sense in order to accommodate this sick theory-for either or both of them to even refer to Madeleine this way with people around them ? Why doesn't Mr Gaspar's statement enjoy the same limelight as Mrs Gaspar's do you think ?Maybe because it's realistic and dull -and contradicts Mrs Gaspar's .

      ''Paedophilia was, however, invented by the McCanns to make an abduction by a sexbeast seem possible or likely.''

      When a small child is snatched by an adult anywhere and fails to turn up 3 or 4 days later, the vast majority of the public suspect the same. That, or murder. The vast majority of time, they're right. Adults don't snatch children because they lack company and conversation, or drinking buddies.You know that, I know that. Why shouldn't the McCanns know that ? They get criticised for 'inventing' the childless couple scenario.They get criticised for facing a probability that is more sinister.They get criticised for saying nothing. They are basically cornered by a mob who don't mind throwing accusations without evidence.The Amaral effect.Free speech, apparently.

      VT

      Delete
  29. And the conspiracy theories continue.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Got a better one? One that involves a sole perpetrator? Otherwise it's, er, a conspiracy theory.

      Delete
    2. That is your conspiracy theory 20:57

      Delete
  30. A conspiracy theory is an explanatory proposition that accuses two or more persons, a group, or an organization of having caused or covered up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an illegal or harmful event or situation....Although the term “conspiracy theory” has acquired a derogatory meaning over time and is often used to dismiss or ridicule beliefs in conspiracies, it has also continued to be used by some to refer to actual, proven conspiracies.

    So, it's clear why people often use the term in a derogatory sense. it's clear, also, why they shy away from conspiracy theories that have been proven to be bang on the money throughout the unwarranted mocking.

    It doesn't matter if you believe a lone abductor hypothesis, a police /governement/intel /or the 'pact of silence gang' hypothesis. They would all require a conspiracy somewhere in the mystery.

    VT

    ReplyDelete
  31. I see bennett is back (again) from his "self-imposed" exile. Commenting about the bus video: "I feel, that something serious happened to Madeleine very early that week."

    So he accuses the Mccanns of being liars again.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mr Bennett,is stating that the layout of the video,(A)children climbing the steps of the aeroplane,Lily,Madeleine?
      Then the video is of a bus ride containing,(B)the Payne,McCann family relatives,it(video)is not clear of which airport Bus journey,East Midlands or Portugal?
      To be fair to Mr Bennett,in this context it could be construed of a departure/arrival as above,but if the film has been"Adapted" to suit an ulterior motive that is something completely different?
      It doesn't make Mr Bennett a Liar,if he is questioning a filmed scenario of an event that may never have happened in the context shown in the video?
      Yes the Video is evidence of Madeleine,Families group going on holiday by Aeroplane,then a Bus ride,leading the viewer of an arrival destination?
      That is the question being asked,is it of the latter or the former option?

      Delete
    2. He 'feels' it ? He means he suspects it, ergo, thinks it. There's nothing that will detract amateur detectives. Absence of evidence doesn't mean there's no concrete proof to them. That's all you need to know about their mindset and intentions. They see a film that contradicts their own carefully constructed narrative and it has to have been 'adapted', like photographs have to had been 'adapted'.Anything but facing the reality that they guessed wrong. Don't snatch that toy from them, they scream.

      VT

      Delete
    3. Hi VT,but what if it has all been concocted,to evade any of their actions,that may have happened during the Holiday from 28 April to 3 May 2007?
      Are they all innocent of committing Criminal acts?

      Delete