Sunday 17 February 2019

THE CASE FOR GONCALO AMARAL

 
So much effort to destroy the name of Goncalo Amaral, even now 12 years on.  So much rage and hatred, especially when I state, for the record, that Goncalo Amaral is a hero.  Well tough, he is a hero, to those of us who could see what was going on, he was the one man to stand up and tell the truth. I can see why the McCanns could never forgive him for that, they were doing so well at the time.  He shattered their dreams of turning Madeleine's Fund into a large corporation (with a TV channel) and holding a global Madeleine Day every year.  No wonder they were pissed.
 
But here's a thing.  It was Gerry and Kate being made arguidos that ended their dreams of world domination and stopped the flow of donations to their Fund. They continue to blame GA, but they are ignoring all the other circumstances that existed at the time.  
 
Focusing all their anger and hatred towards GA has been Kate and Gerry's downfall.  As Confucius said, 'when you go on a journey of revenge, dig two graves'.  In their efforts to destroy GA, they have destroyed themselves. They have blown all the millions that were so generously given to them to find Madeleine, on pursuing Goncalo Amaral in every civil court in Portugal.
 
They destroyed their reputations, such as they were with the arguido status, by suing, for cash, the detective who searched for their daughter. Even they know how unpopular that decision was because the public have never rushed to refill their coffers.
 
Goncalo Amaral had no option but to write his book. The very efficient Team McCann were trashing his name all over British media.  They thought his status as a former detective would prevent him from telling his side of the story.  They were wrong.  They thought the medical code of ethics that apply to them as doctors, should apply to detectives and journalists also.  If they have professional rules to abide by, so should they.
 
Unfortunately for them, Goncalo Amaral turned out to be not only a gifted writer but his book was corroborated by the official police files that had been released a  month earlier.  His account of the summer of 2007 was verified by the police investigation. 
 
As a wannabe best seller myself, I know how hard it is to grab the public’s attention.  Kate and Gerry are probably kicking themselves now, because it was they who put GA’s book into the spotlight and onto the best seller list. They have obviously never heard of The Streisand Effect, or they wanted his book to do well.  They held off for a year for the Royalties to come in, before they sued them.  
 
My current rush of correspondents are demonising Goncalo Amaral to such an extent, I feel I should explain how I see him, and probably how most see him, as Kate and Gerry have elevated him so much, he has remained a central character in this drama.  Had they not interfered in fate, his character would have been a bit part at best, now he is the hero.
 
Most popular fictional cops have flaws, but we are OK with that, we like to see these seasoned old thief takers as human, just like us.  Some drink too much, some have relationship problems, some are terrible dads, the list goes on.  These men (and they are mostly men) are so caught up in their work, that their private lives are neglected. 
 
Team McCann and their affiliates in the media industry, went straight for Goncalo Amaral's private life to attack him.  His marriage, his kids.  GA and the Portuguese police were tailed by paparazzi trying to get unflattering pictures of them to put alongside headlines like lazy sardine munchers.  They ignored the fact that these officers were working night and day, and literally sleeping at their desks.  This perfect couple were attacking the imperfections of GA and others to make themselves look better.  It's an oldy but goody, and used by every playground bully.
 
Goncalo Amaral had no option but to write a book.  He had every right to defend himself and the Portuguese Supreme Court agreed.  Unfortunately it is still not available in the UK, which is yet another huge injustice against GA and those who want to buy it.  
 
Unfortunately, no matter how much we have accumulated in life, when we leave this world, the only thing we leave behind is our name and reputation.  Our legacy.   Goncalo Amaral wrote a book, I write a blog.  Like GA, I have confidence in my own words.  Despite what others say about me, I say read my blogs, judge for yourselves. 
 
Gerry and Kate set out to destroy not only GA's name, but his life.  They wanted and going by their plans to appeal to the ECHRs, they still want revenge.  On my last blog they have gone into nuclear mode over their false allegations that just won't stick.  Many thanks Carolina.  GA is not perfect, we accept that, GA accepts that, but he is not a brutal, third world cop, and Gerry and Kate are not victims.

236 comments:

  1. Large corporation with a TV channel?

    What are you on about?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ros has cracked! I was just about to switch off the bedside light when I saw this link on her tweet.

      Now I wish I'd carried on!

      This has to be the daftest blog so far.

      Goncalo Amaral a hero? He is very far removed from that title!

      Goodness me!

      Delete
  2. His record speaks for itself:

    Convicted of perjury in May 2009, he received an 18-month suspended prison sentence.

    [perjury - The offence of wilfully telling an untruth or making a misrepresentation under oath]

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Commited perhury during the investigation of a missing child who, it transpired, had been murdered.What a hero; what a professional.Then he later finds a loophole to do the same in the McCann case and hides behind the 'free speech' guard. Coward.

      Delete
    2. ''So much effort to destroy the name of Goncalo Amaral, even now 12 years on. So much rage and hatred, especially when I state, for the record, that Goncalo Amaral is a hero.''

      Your 'stating for the record 'is your self-aggrandizing way of doing no more than the avergae Joe. You're stating your own opinion.You have told yourself the lie of your own importance in all things McCann that you now believe your statements have been elevated to the level you've elevated yourself to.Self-praise is no recommendation was my old mum's saying.Before you kiss your Amaral portrait goodnight tonight, bear in mind it wasn't his heroism that prompted his superiors to remove him from a case. And he wasn't found guilty of heroism in a court of law.He's your hero because he has never held back on the contempt he holds for the parents of a misisng child and neither do you.Yet neither of you could deliver in a court of law with your theories.Now he's famous for his bitterness, anger ( is he your hero or soul mate ?), and the illicit profiteering a court has allowed him to continue.If he ever does anything heroic, i'll join the chorus.In the meantime I'll ignore the fool as he counts the money he continues to make from the awful fate of an innocent child.

      When this fool decided to publicly call the parents liars and accuse them of burying the corpse of their child he sank too low to ever hold the respect of normal people.He could only have received that if he had backed his accusations up and helped to solve the case.He still hasn't backed them up and there has still been nothing else to back them up after 12 years. How can anyone consider that heroism ? Nobody in their right mind could. Which leaves people not in their right mind, obviously.The same people who call it heroic also call the parents of the missing child he was supposed to be looking for spiteful and nasty for having the audacity to demand the disgraced officer back up his claims. And why can't he ? because- he says- MI5 are hiding all the tuth. Really ?

      ''As a wannabe best seller myself, I know how hard it is to grab the public’s attention.''

      It isn't rocket science. Ask Amaral.

      The lunatics who march behind Amaral's banner have their jaundiced eys blinkered.They are consumed by their own resentment and the need to find vent. How else can you explain why they view a man making the most lurid, sick allegations at parents who have lost a child as a hero, but call the parents evil fo complaining about it ?

      ''Gerry and Kate set out to destroy not only GA's name Gerry and Kate set out to destroy not only GA's name, but his life. ''

      This so called detective was found guilty in court relating to a crime he committed years before Madeleine was abducted.It was his superiors who removed him from the case.It was his own choice to later make allegations which he couldn't support.But, according to the 'balanced' bloggers, it was all the fault of the McCanns..

      Delete
    3. Goodness me, the subject of Goncalo Amaral really does make your blood boil, it's almost like you are personally involved. I don't kiss GA's portrait before I go off to bed, the idea is absurd, pure playground. I have many heroes in many walks of life, as most thinking adults do, there's nothing juvenile about it.

      Going onto your next paragraph. GA did back up his theories, quite convincingly actually, enough to make the McCanns spend millions trying to make him and his book go away. It didn't work they lost.

      No-one is marching behind Amaral's banner. Again, that is a product of your own imagination. People don't disbelieve the McCanns abductor story because they need something to vent about, they don't believe it because it is not believable.

      You want to believe that GA is guilty of all sorts, but all that shit you are throwing just keeps boomeranging right back at you. In the words of GA, the world will soon know the truth of the lie.

      Delete
    4. How do you take a detective convicted of perjury and who jeopardised not only his own career and future but that of his team and convert it into heroism ? Just because he hates the parents of a missing child ? Because he is as irrational as you are ? You praise and worship anyone who reminds you of you.And, frankly, if they share any of the traits you struggle to hide, they'll get praise from no other type of person.It's empty praise.

      ''GA did back up his theories, quite convincingly actually,..enough to make the McCanns spend millions trying to make him and his book go away. It didn't work they lost.''

      Sums you up perfectly. Backing up his whacky unfounded theories would have resulted in the case being solved and his two suspects jailed.So he didn't back them up convincingly.But he prompted the McCanns to shell out big money to shut his vindictive mouth.And that, for you, is convincing enough.Because you are vindictive, malicious, and spiteful.

      '' People don't disbelieve the McCanns abductor story because they need something to vent about, they don't believe it because it is not believable. ''

      No. The lunatics marching behind Amaral don't-or rather won't- believe it.But the lunatics are online gossiping. Why haven't the police disbelieved it and acted on it ? They've had 12 years and 12 million to do it.

      ''You want to believe that GA is guilty of all sorts, but all that shit you are throwing just keeps boomeranging right back at you. In the words of GA, the world will soon know the truth of the lie.''

      He is guilty of defamation of character, libel and slander until he produces tangible evidence that demonstrates otherwise.He is also guilty of perjury. That's 'all sorts' enough for me or any other sane observer. By calling his best seller 'the truth of the lie' he is also guilty of irony and taking the urine.

      Delete
    5. The Truth Of The Lie : by a convicted perjure. lol

      Delete
    6. ''. In the words of GA, the world will soon know the truth of the lie.''

      Soon ? What year did he broadcast or write that lie ?

      Delete
    7. I praise, very rarely do I worship. Goncalo Amaral I praise for his dignity throughout, he's had 12 years of rats snapping at his heels, but he has shown strength of character, he has never capitulated to them.

      You then say he should shut his vindictive mouth and then you call me vindictive, malicious and spiteful. Is that you Aunty Phi? Why? Because I believe GA has as much right to tell his story as the McCanns? And because I don't believe in banning and burning books? You are projecting here. Banning and burning books is vindictive, malicious and spiteful.

      To be continued.

      Delete
    8. Hi anon17 February 2019 at 17:42
      (I just had to comment, though it is a discussion between you and Rosalinda)

      "He is guilty of defamation of character, libel and slander until he produces tangible evidence that demonstrates otherwise"

      So the McCanns thought as well, but the Portuguese Supreme Court ruled in favour of Amaral, as you may have heard.

      Delete
    9. Yes Bjorn. The trial was about the publishing rights. That's about it. If the McCanns pushed it and went the ECHR route it would be a different story. The book would be of secondary importance.The court said its ok to publish it as fiction. You know fiction don't you Bjorn ? It's the opposite of fact.

      Delete
    10. anon @ 01:58,the only fact known is that Madeleine was reported missing, circa 10 pm on the 3/05/2007,any claim to an abduction is fictional,its not been determined what crime as been committed as yet.

      Delete
    11. Anonymous 17 February 2019 at 14:21

      [perjury - The offence of wilfully telling an untruth or making a misrepresentation under oath]”

      What about Kate’s testimony at Leveson Enquiry?

      A bear

      Delete
    12. @ Anonymous18 February 2019 at 10:10
      "What about Kate’s testimony at Leveson Enquiry?"

      What about it?

      Delete
  3. It goes from bad to worse here. I don't know which is worse, the toe curling schoolgirl gushing or the bi-polar attack on the parents.Both are quite sickening in their own way, but side by side look quite astonishing. And this is from someone who considers herself educated and who never gets angry.The lies come thick and fast here lately.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Toe curling schoolgirl gushing eh 16:37. Do give me an example. I agree it adds drama to your post,

      A bipolar attack on the parents. Not at all. I am not attacking the parents, I am defending the detective they constantly abuse. If GA were that way inclined he would bring legal action against all those who are libelling him, including on here. As host of this blog however, I don't have to let you get away with it.

      I find the McCann supporters' defence of Leonor Cipriano quite sickening. I'm sure most people do.

      Delete
    2. "I find the McCann supporters' defence of Leonor Cipriano quite sickening. I'm sure most people do."

      If you re-read the posts concerning Leonor, you'll find that those posters were not stating that she was innocent, but defending Leonor's right to a proper and lawful interrogation.

      Delete
    3. ''A bipolar attack on the parents. Not at all. I am not attacking the parents, I am defending the detective they constantly abuse.''

      This is the man they had to have faith in to find the little girl.He failed and his superiors removed him for what reasons ? Perjury ? Who knows. But he failed them and then rubbed salt into the wound by telling the world that they were guilty and buried their own child.He produced no evidence.He still hasn't,And the parents still haven't got the child back.But you say that's THEM abusing HIM.Sick.

      ''Toe curling schoolgirl gushing eh 16:37. Do give me an example. I agree it adds drama to your post,''

      Its a simple obervation.No drama. ''I state, for the record, that Goncalo Amaral is a hero. Well tough, he is a hero''. That's one phrase of gushing as an example.But anyone interested can go back through years of your blog and see more anywhere you type his name.

      ''I find the McCann supporters' defence of Leonor Cipriano quite sickening. I'm sure most people do.''

      For the recod. I'm not a McCann supporter beyond the 'innocent until proven guilty' defence.And if all those detectives in 12 years cant prove it then that's ebough until they can. I would never defend Cipriano. I think she should have been put in an electric chair with her partner.To criticise Amaral for falsifying evidence / statements in the case isn't to defend that woman.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous 17 February 2019 at 17:42

      “He is guilty of defamation of character, libel and slander until he produces tangible evidence that demonstrates otherwise.He is also guilty of perjury.”

      A simple question: Why did the McCanns sue Amaral for damages, and lost, if he was, according to you, so obviously guilty of libel, a more serious offence?

      W-t-P

      Delete
    5. Anonymous 18 February 2019 at 01:30

      “For the recod. I'm not a McCann supporter beyond the 'innocent until proven guilty' defence.”

      I take Your Wonderfulness’s word for it.

      “To criticise Amaral for falsifying evidence / statements in the case isn't to defend that woman.”

      I agree with that, but to bark at the kind gentlema like a bloodthirsty hound is unprincely, my Prince. What were you up to last night? :)

      For Your Deliciousness’s kind attention:
      http://sprott.physics.wisc.edu/Chaos-Complexity/dialogue.pdf

      W-t-P

      Delete
    6. Appreciate the PD Winifred. I have it in my collection for later. Thank you.

      Why do I bark like a dog at the gentleman? I'm assuming you're referring to Amaral. I don't see him as a gentleman. But that's of secondary importance. You know the expression 'bringing a dog to the fight' I'm sure. I learned many moons ago how to be my own dog.You see, if somebody's raving like a lunatic in your direction you don't put down the gun and pick up a spoon. Enough metaphors. I'm sure you take my point..

      Delete
    7. ''A simple question: Why did the McCanns sue Amaral for damages, and lost, if he was, according to you, so obviously guilty of libel, a more serious offence?

      W-t-P''

      Like anyone else, I can only guess. Unlike most, I'm admitting it's only a guess. I think the legal team advised them and they followed the instuctions. Probably on the basis of 'you get what you pay for'. Unfortunately, they over estimated Portugal's cultural mentality. I think the legal team assumes Portugal were also part of the 21st century. In hindsight they shold have went for Amaral not the book. That victory would have made a battle over the book a shoo-in,

      Delete
  4. Goncalo Amaral believed what the British police told him to believe, death occurred in 5A, something that could never be proved but it prevented the PJ from looking any further.

    It still doesn't make any sense why he didn't trust the British element yet he trusted them when the dogs were brought in. I just don't get why the dogs made him change his focus. He should have continued not trusting the British and looked elsewhere for answers.

    Death in 5A has been made way too obvious and that's one of the reasons I don't believe it, all the British did was seal the deal, and Goncalo fell for it.

    The British police were not there to help the Portuguese, but to hinder them, and it worked. People believe in abduction or death in 5A, there's never an alternative.

    No wonder a body has never been found.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Good points, well made. All point to governmental panic.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 17 February at 16:46

      Do you think it is possible that they tried to play Amaral and the McCanns off against each other?

      Delete
  5. I suspect (though they'll not recognise it) the blog was written for the very responses its received(nice bit of fishing and they have bitten),Amaral wrote a book end of,successfully defended that right under Portuguese law.What the critics fail to bring to the table is how he was responsible for Madeleine's disappearance.

    Getting untoward 12 yrs now,no one in any official capacity has said they have evidence that Madeleine left 5a alive,the last update by Rowley in 2017 would only say they have no evidence either way of the girl being dead or alive.So much for the theory of Amaral being way off track.
    Go figure, £12 million and counting, can't be many more cupboards left at Scotland yard to search in the last,last lead,they sure as hell aren't out in Portugal.

    Anon @ 16:46,the body was never to be found,ask Smithman.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ''Amaral wrote a book end of,successfully defended that right under Portuguese law.What the critics fail to bring to the table is how he was responsible for Madeleine's disappearance.''

      That's because the critics criticise it as being filled with nothing more than theories, guesses and wild hypothesising based on nothing but suspicion.Or, in other words-lies.They don't need to even consider why he was responsible for Madeleine's disappearance. He was responsible for the investigation intially, though. What his supporters fail to bring to the table is why he got nowhere and nobody was arrested.Or why, once he was removed, his colleagues didn't trust his theories enough to act on them.

      ''Getting untoward 12 yrs now,no one in any official capacity has said they have evidence that Madeleine left 5a alive''

      Has anyone in any official capacity said they have evidence that she left the apartment dead ?

      ''Anon @ 16:46,the body was never to be found,ask Smithman.''

      Very enigmatic. What would Smithman know ? And how ? More guessing...

      Delete
    2. ''Amaral wrote a book end of,successfully defended that right under Portuguese law.What the critics fail to bring to the table is how he was responsible for Madeleine's disappearance.''

      That's because the critics criticise it as being filled with nothing more than theories, guesses and wild hypothesising based on nothing but suspicion.Or, in other words-lies.They don't need to even consider why he was responsible for Madeleine's disappearance. He was responsible for the investigation intially, though. What his supporters fail to bring to the table is why he got nowhere and nobody was arrested.Or why, once he was removed, his colleagues didn't trust his theories enough to act on them.

      ''Getting untoward 12 yrs now,no one in any official capacity has said they have evidence that Madeleine left 5a alive''

      Has anyone in any official capacity said they have evidence that she left the apartment dead ?

      ''Anon @ 16:46,the body was never to be found,ask Smithman.''

      Very enigmatic. What would Smithman know ? And how ? More guessing...

      Delete
    3. let's get rid of 'GA's colleagues didn't trust his theories enough to act on them'.

      You seem to forget that the McCanns remained Arguidos for almost a year after Goncalo Amaral was removed from the investigation. His colleagues, far from dismissing his theories were trying to arrange for the McCanns and their friends to return to Portugal for a reconstruction.
      They refused. And everything since then points to the McCanns and their friends refusing to co-operate with the police. They are hiding behind lawyers.

      Delete
    4. ''Because GA had already made his mind up as to what had happened to Joana (albeit 4 different versions). ''

      Only 4 ? He must have been just warming up for the McCann case. If he could have kept his whacky ideas down to 4 then maybe the investigation would have been focused at least. But he is one for inventing a scenario, becoming fond of it, so fond he doesn't mind how he goes about getting people to fit it. It's his trademark.No wonder he eventually turned to writing a novel.Sorry, I mean a literary work.

      Delete
  6. How astute 17:35. Sometimes it is not enough for me to explain the insanity of the McCann supporters, sometimes I have to demonstrate it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The McCann supporters demonstrate their insanity quite well by themselves, you don't need to do anything.
      Carolina

      Delete
    2. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton17 February 2019 at 18:03
      ''How astute 17:35. Sometimes it is not enough for me to explain the insanity of the McCann supporters, sometimes I have to demonstrate it.''

      Name calling (again). Beats intelligent and mature debate(again).A weak rebuttal ( again)

      Delete
  7. "Anon @ 16:46,the body was never to be found,ask Smithman."

    Smithman? I think you should read the thread of an earlier post that discussed the Smith's statements. If anything, they suggest an unknown abductor.

    "How astute 17:35. Sometimes it is not enough for me to explain the insanity of the McCann supporters, sometimes I have to demonstrate it."

    Raising valid points about basic human rights and GA's lack of integrity, doesn't make those posters McCann supporters or insane.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm impressed by your passion for human rights 18:29, why don't you make a banner 'Basic human rights for child murderers', I'm sure you will get quite a crowd. People who kill children do not generally inspire the milk of human kindness, so good of you to speak up for them.

      Delete
    2. Here's a wake up call.

      Ros says this blog is for musing and discussing. It's peppered throughout her blog.

      Ros says she doesn't claim to know what happened to Madeleine McCann.

      Ros says She hasn't accused the parents of killing their child.

      Ros says she has no bias.

      A poster on her balanced 'discussion' blog says :

      (17 February 2019 at 18:29) : '' Raising valid points about basic human rights and GA's lack of integrity, doesn't make those posters McCann supporters or insane. ''

      Ros replies :

      (18 February 2019 at 12:10) : '' I'm impressed by your passion for human rights 18:29, why don't you make a banner 'Basic human rights for child murderers','

      Anyone smell anything there ? No ? Ok try this :

      '' People who kill children do not generally inspire the milk of human kindness, so good of you to speak up for them. ''

      Smell it yet ?

      Delete
    3. "I'm impressed by your passion for human rights 18:29, why don't you make a banner 'Basic human rights for child murderers', I'm sure you will get quite a crowd. People who kill children do not generally inspire the milk of human kindness, so good of you to speak up for them."

      Tosh Ros!! They were sentenced because of their confessions. There is a reason why most countries do not allow torture when obtaining confessions, even when the suspects are child killers. Those confessions are unreliable.

      What is surprising is that it took two whole days of brutal interrogation to get confessions out of either of the two relatively simple and uneducated suspects. As an ex army man, I can assure you that many trained in the art of interrogation techniques would have cracked in less - unless, of course, they were actually not guilty of the crimes they were being accused of.

      Delete
    4. I feel your comment deserves a drum roll 13:20, but I have no idea why.

      Do you think I am rabble rousing? Stirring up an angry mob? Are you letting your imagination run away with you again? Or are you more angered that your claims of Portuguese police brutality are falling on stoney ground?

      Gerry and Kate were not treated brutally by the Portuguese police, so they latched on vicariously to another mother accused of her killing her child. They latched onto her lies to such an extent that they paid for her lawyer. Let that sink in. They gave financial support to a murderess in order to damage the reputation of the detective who was investigating them. They didn't give two hoots who battered the face of the odious Leonor Cipriano, they just wanted people to believe Goncalo Amaral did it.

      It was yet another devious, murky little plot, played by out by Team McCann to convince the world the parents were innocent victims of an inept and corrupt police force. The negative propaganda campaign against the Portuguese police, began on the very first night. 'No-one's helping us, no-one's doing anything' they informed everyone in their contact lists. Thereafter they had plenty of time to buy white boards and stationery and sit about scheming. As brother John so enthusiastically exclaimed, 'they are a very proactive family'.

      Unfortunately, this particular fiendish plan went awry because they didn't check out the lawyer they employed and he blabbed to everyone. Whilst cunning plans may sound feasible in the making, they rarely turn out well.

      Delete
    5. And where is your evidence for 'two days of brutal interrogation' coming from. Two lying murderers and a dodgy lawyer employed by the McCanns.

      As for interrogation techniques, there is no reason to think Portugal is different to any other civilised country. Portuguese police are educated to degree level, there is nothing thuggish or third world about them.

      Gerry, Kate and their friends were all interrogated for many hours. The transcripts are available online, no sign whatsoever of police brutality or thumbscrews of any sort. None confessed. After they lawyered up, interrogations came to an end.

      The worst complaints Kate had against the Portuguese police were that they were scruffy, smoking, and ignoring her and her husband's plight as they dashed around doing their work. They were not offered comfort or light refreshments.

      And that's it. The fiends. Allegations of Portuguese police brutality helped set the scene for Gerry and Kate's claims of being victimised. The case of Joana Cipriano was seized upon by the McCanns to demonstrate there was a child predator on the loose. A shame they didn't do a bit more research, the sickening nature of the crime and the hideous character of the mother, has contributed to their loss of popularity.

      As we know, thousands of cases where witnesses and suspects who refuse to talk, are brought to trial. I guess some detectives see it as a mission, a challenge. We are all now familiar with cold cases being re-opened and the evidence put through newer, more advanced technology.

      You seem to think that Leonor and brother holding out for two days is a sign of their innocence. Two days of duress I should have added. That they could keep quiet is enough for you? How come no-one else has ever been arrested or even suspected of Joana's murder?

      Delete
    6. "How come no-one else has ever been arrested or even suspected of Joana's murder?"

      Because GA had already made his mind up as to what had happened to Joana (albeit 4 different versions). The confessions were all that the mother and uncle could be charged on. There was no forensic evidence that could stand on its own. The court has ruled that 'aggression' was used in the interrogation. Eleanor didn't fall down the stairs.

      Delete
  8. "Most popular fictional cops have flaws, but we are OK with that, we like to see these seasoned old thief takers as human, just like us."

    And there's the problem Ros, you have this image of GA in your head that is rose tinted and fantasist. We are talking about a man who cordinated the brutal interrogation of a woman, and then lied about it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No need to lie. He did not coordinate any interrogations, much less brutal ones. Your hatred knows no bounds.
      Carolina

      Delete
    2. No he didn't and you are lying now.

      You really need to get over your anger that GA's book was far superior to Kate's. And of course the fact that GA is now able to profit from that book just as the McCanns were able to profit from Madeleine.

      The worst part about all this for the McCanns is that Goncalo Amaral is on course to be the hero as was seen by the phenomenal response to the legal fund that was set up for him. As I said earlier, it was they who elevated him, it was they who gave him his hero status. That's got to stick in the craw.

      Delete
    3. Just to be clear. I am not prepared to demonise Goncalo Amaral based on the lurid accusations of two of his former suspects. People who have a multitude of reasons to blacken his name.

      His honest book, as compared to Kate's disingenuous one, revealed the gentleman and scholar behind the cop. Ok he isn't perfect, but he doesn't pretend to be. Kate on the other hand is Stepford perfect, but it doesn't endear her to anyone.

      As a rational, thinking adult I don't wear rose tinted glasses, do you? My judgement is as valid as yours, not something to be ridiculed as if there is something wrong with me. Do you really want me to do character profiles of Kate, Gerry and Goncalo?

      For now I will say this much. Look at the videos of Goncalo Amaral, coming out of Court, being interviews, on chat shows. He is cool, calm, confident and relaxed. Then look at Kate and Gerry. They are like deer caught in headlights. Nervous, jittery, stressed. They have never once been able to relax. OK once, the Expresso Interview.

      GA must of course have been stressed, look at all the weight he lost, but he has remained stoical and determined as though he always knew truth and justice would prevail.

      The McCanns have not fared so well. They rarely if ever give interviews anymore, that confidence has gone. I personally don't like to see them as they are, I don't like to see anyone suffering. And suffering is the word I was searching for. They look as though they are suffering.

      Delete
    4. ''His honest book, as compared to Kate's disingenuous one,''

      According to you.According to the haters. According to those who don't have the stamina to look in depth at anything and debate both sides with any genuine intellect. When the alleagstions in his book bring about an arrest and when Kate's book is proven to be dishonet, your opinion will be valid.Not before.

      Delete
    5. ''His honest book, as compared to Kate's disingenuous one,''

      According to you.According to the haters. According to those who don't have the stamina to look in depth at anything and debate both sides with any genuine intellect. When the alleagstions in his book bring about an arrest and when Kate's book is proven to be dishonet, your opinion will be valid.Not before.

      Delete
    6. "No need to lie. He did not coordinate any interrogations, much less brutal ones. Your hatred knows no bounds.
      Carolina"

      Please let us have your interpretation of what a 'co-ordinator' is, Carolina.

      Oh, and the Portuguese court took it as proven that Leonor had been subject to brutal interrogation.

      Delete
    7. Anonymous 01:16/01:25

      According to you, genuine intellect.

      Delete
    8. 'people who don't have the stamina to look in depth at anything'.

      You thought that statement so good, you wrote it twice. But here's a thing, the chances are that you and indeed all the other Ziggys, have not read Goncalo Amaral's book. The original Ziggy is quite proud of the fact.

      It is clear to anyone who has read GA's excellent book, and there are many on here who have, that all these angry critics of GA haven't got a clue what they are talking about. It really isn't possible to review and criticise a book you haven't read. I had to do it once in an 0-level exam*, and I got away with it, but then I do have the gift of the gab :)

      People with an ott interest in the Madeleine case, myself and most who read here lol, have read EVERYTHING, literally everything. The McCann lies do not work because they are not based on truth. People do not accept that GA is a brutal, third world cop, because he clearly isn't. We can see that not only from his demeanour, the way he speaks and conducts himself, but also from his intelligent writing. His education level is much higher than the McCanns, he has clearly spent a lifetime acquiring wisdom, whilst for Gerry and Kate wisdom has passed them by.


      *the book was 'A Kestrel for a Knave', and the guilt is still with me lol! My loss I really must read it one day, but in defence, I was totally captivated by 'Wuthering Heights', another of my set books.

      Delete
    9. Correct, 08:32.

      Delete
    10. I've read an on-line translation of the book - which seems to have been put through the google translate tool.

      Did you read the original Portuguese version Ros, or do you have your own better translated copy?

      Delete
    11. I originally read it on the AnnEsse website 13:54, but I can't see it there now. I remember there was talk at one time of taking it down from those sites, so I am not sure what is going on. Hopefully it will be available in the UK and on Amazon soon, I feel my copy of Madeleine (bought in a second hand shop)should have a companion read beside it on my bookshelf. My own, I shall put in the middle ;)

      Delete
    12. '' But here's a thing, the chances are that you and indeed all the other Ziggys, have not read Goncalo Amaral's book. The original Ziggy is quite proud of the fact.''

      All what other Ziggys ? You should keep your paranoia quiet. You can still have it but keep it to yourself. You have words to read on a screen- nothing more. The rest is your imagination. Anyone who disagrees with unfounded nonsense that frames the McCanns is either a 'ream', 'team mccann' or a group of trolls. Is that to give the impression that only a team can take you and your bizarre theorising on ? Sorry. Not evern close to the truth. You sound a bit mad.

      ''It is clear to anyone who has read GA's excellent book, and there are many on here who have, that all these angry critics of GA haven't got a clue what they are talking about.''

      Perjury : '' the offence of wilfully telling an untruth or making a misrepresentation under oath.''

      We're talking about that for starters. Commiting an offence and being found guilty of it.That's a serious offence for a civilian to commit.But this was a co-ordinating detective investigating the murder of a child.He basically lied and covered up the lies of his team. Yet you think those little nuggets provide suitable credentials to write a book calling two other people liars who haven't been found guilty of anything or even faced trial. The 'truth of the lie ' ? He needs to understand the difference bwteen truth and lying first wouldn't you say ?

      Let's have a little game of empathy. Imagine you're little girl had apparently been snatched abroad and nothing appeared to be happening fast enough. Somebody tells you the lead detective has a court case pending for perjury- and his team were under investigation-and it was the case of a missing little girl who had been killed.Would you shrug it off or go crazy ?Try to be honest. It won't hurt. Add to the mix that certain PJ detectives were inventing leaks to the press for free meals and drinks and we don't exactly have the FBI or Scotland Yard on the case do we.

      All that's needed to know about Amaral is the following check list :

      He was the original lead detective in the McCann case. He was found guilty of perjury during investigations and removed.He blamed MI5 for it.He then decided to get revenge and somebody to co-ordinate his thoughts and opinions in the form of a book. He suggested the parents had buried their child ( no evidence). He said they had stored her in a refrigartor or freezer first. He also said they secreted the child into the coffin of a lady that was due to be creametd the day after ( in the chapel-they had keys).He said she was buried, probably down a well of sorts.You don't need to read his book to know all of those are wild shots in the dark.!2 years on nobody's consultrf the 'excellent book' or Amaral with a view to solving and closing the case.

      Amaral's online fan club cling on to one fact-''he frames the parents we hate''- and that's it.That makes the book 'excellent' It matters not that nothing in the book has ever been proved right or that his theories contradict one another wildly.It matters not that the McCanns words have yet to be proven to be 'lies' by any officers- they wantto sell the idea of them lying to foment hatred.

      ''Delusional disorder, previously called paranoid disorder, is a type of serious mental illness called a psychotic disorder. People who have it can’t tell what’s real from what is imagined.''

      Delete
    13. LOL, as I have said many times I have undergone intense, clinical, psychological evaluation by two psychiatrists. No delusional disorder, no paranoid disorder and no psychotic disorder. In fact both psychiatrists agreed in a Court room, that I was a thoroughly good egg. It would seem you are projecting all these diagnosis you are chucking into the mix.

      GA's book is a shortened, easier to read, account of the original investigation. It is not fiction, GA's account is corroborated by the police files.

      I'm sure every suspect believes the police hate them and virtually every prisoner claims they were framed and that is the behaviour Kate and Gerry exhibit when voicing their opinion of GA. In a nutshell, this constant rage and need for vengeance against one man, does them no favours whatsoever. It makes you (them) look mad.

      Bizarre you ask me to imagine a situation that even Kate knows nothing about, how can I empathise with someone I believe is lying to me? If I were a mother who had lost a child, I would have treated the police who were searching for my child with respect! The police were Madeleine's best hope of being found, why antagonise them? The McCanns are of the mentality that if you whip a servant the servant will work harder. They won't, they will spit in your food.

      I was going to berate your patronising reference to GA's fan club, but do you know what. Fan club is probably right, though not a club per se, but hundreds of thousands online who do not believe the abduction story. Of course the websites etc, began long before anyone knew Goncalo Amaral's name.

      Finally, '....nothing in his book has ever been proved right', Ooh, you know that's one of those statements where you really should touch wood as you say it. You don't know that. No-one does. Everything he discovered however has kept the case open, even 12 years on.

      Delete
    14. ''It would seem you are projecting all these diagnosis you are chucking into the mix.''

      Your 'projecting' insult is really old now.It wasn't even effective when it was young.Do better.

      ''Bizarre you ask me to imagine a situation that even Kate knows nothing about, how can I empathise with someone I believe is lying to me?''

      Again you misunderstand the simplest of tasks.I asked you to imagine yourslef in a situation. It was hypothetical. All i wanted was some honesty.I give up trying to get any from you if that's how determined you are to avoid it.

      ''The McCanns are of the mentality that if you whip a servant the servant will work harder. They won't, they will spit in your food. ''

      Or commit perjury.

      '' Fan club is probably right, though not a club per se, but hundreds of thousands online who do not believe the abduction story. ''

      Even more 'online' felt Trump was a great candidate to lead America.Hundreds of thousands thought Linday Chambelain had killed her own baby ( ''the dingos innocent !!'' etc).Big numbers mean nothing.Fools will follow any band wagon if the crowds big enough.

      '' Ooh, you know that's one of those statements where you really should touch wood as you say it.''

      Why ? It's a cold fact. I'd have been touching wood for 12 years now.

      '' Everything he discovered however has kept the case open, even 12 years on.''

      He didn't discover anything.Nobody else did either or has done since. That's why we're 12 years on . Can you not accept simple facts ? Yu could, of course, tell us ll what he discovered that was so crucial. I'll find the met's email and claim the reward.It seems all those thousands of online detectives who 'know' the truth and 'know' Amaral was right don't need the money..

      Delete
    15. If you keep projecting, I will keep pointing it out.

      All I wanted was some honesty from Kate and Gerry. Honesty can be quite appealing, they should try it some time.

      Trump and Lindy Chamberlain eh, a distraction from the fact that the majority of the public no longer believe the abduction story. It hasn't stood the test of time. But I will agree with you, the masses can be wrong, particularly when they are being fed false information like the McCanns are saints. Don't think many believe that now.

      You can say he [GA] didn't discover anything til the cows come home, but everything he found is keeping two investigations live, 12 years on.

      I can accept facts. It is you who cannot accept the contents of the police files and GA's book. The facts are the blood and cadaver dogs alerted, 11 times, and Madeleine has not been seen in 12 years. Oh and there is no record of anyone dying in Apartment 5A.


      Delete
    16. ''If you keep projecting, I will keep pointing it out.
      All I wanted was some honesty from Kate and Gerry. Honesty can be quite appealing, they should try it some time.''

      Your experience of Psychology began and ended laying on a couch.

      I asked for honesty from you in 'realtime' on your blog.I got none-as usual. Can you or the other woolen ones prove her lies and explain why the police don't agree with your findings ?

      ''Trump and Lindy Chamberlain eh, a distraction from the fact that the majority of the public no longer believe the abduction story''

      No, not a distraction. Just a reminder of how subjective stats can be.They can do any dance you choose.If you rely on them for anything substantial you get another stat- zero.

      ''You can say he [GA] didn't discover anything til the cows come home, but everything he found is keeping two investigations live, 12 years on. ''

      Yes ? And what was it that he discovered 12 years ago that has required substantial funding every 6 months ? Why is their money needed to look at his 'evidence' ?

      ''I can accept facts. It is you who cannot accept the contents of the police files and GA's book.''


      You're talking rubbish.I think you'll find that, apart from the detectives of two forces combined, no prosecution service have accepted anything.That's why no arrests or trials have happened.His evidence is THAT good.

      ''The facts are the blood and cadaver dogs alerted, 11 times, and Madeleine has not been seen in 12 years. Oh and there is no record of anyone dying in Apartment 5A.''

      If they were- or are- facts, then every detective who has been investigating this case and every detective who accepted funding should be charged with obstructing justice or perverting it's course.You're being silly.

      Delete
    17. My 'experience of psychology began and ended laying on a couch'. How insulting. If you are regular reader you will know that I have studied psychology all my adult life. Actually it began in my teens when I would read my Dad's work books - he was a psychiatric nurse.

      'What was it he discovered 12 years ago...…?'. I'm going to go with the dog alerts, the group's peculiar behaviour, the lack of the break in, the trunk of the car being left open overnight, the list is endless. You really should read the book.

      I'm not sure the prosecution services of Portugal and the UK have refused to prosecute anyone. Didn't top officers from the UK's Crown Prosecution Service fly out to Lisbon to meet their Portuguese counterparts? Why bother with such a meeting if the object was to close the files without prosecution?

      You have no idea what the detectives of Operation Grange or the PJ have been or are working on. The idea that the evidence collected by the original investigation has been discarded, is ludicrous.

      In the real world criminals can go for years or even decades without being convicted. That doesn't make them innocent, it simply means they police do not have enough to prosecute. In most cases the police shelve the files as the PJ did, until such time as new evidence becomes available. The PJ were adamant if you remember, that they were not going to re-open their files without new evidence, or the co-operation of the parents and the tapas group. In 2011, they re-opened their investigation, and the British Review, also turned into an investigation.

      I imagine in 2011, that 'new evidence' was available. Of course that 'new evidence' might simply have been the offer from Scotland Yard to investigate the British end. Most of the difficulties experienced by the PJ during the original investigation, was their inability to get hold of important documentation from the UK. Everything they asked for came on one side of an A4 sheet of paper.

      You are among those always looking for reasons to accuse the police of lying or obstructing justice. Sorry, but again you are projecting. In not co-operating with the police, the McCanns and their friends could be accused of obstructing justice. The police are not the ones with something to hide, they have no reason to lie or obstruct justice, and worse, they would probably be sacked on the spot if they did.

      I'm afraid Kate and Gerry's dreams of seeing Goncalo Amaral or any detective investigating Madeleine's disappearance, punished and imprisoned, will remain unfulfilled. Along with dreams to have non believers of the abduction story in the dock facing a Judge. Is it thoughts of revenge that keep them going?

      Being silly is thinking you are home and dry.

      Delete
    18. ''If you are regular reader you will know that I have studied psychology all my adult life.''

      'People watching' is just watching people. Everyone does it. Studying the subject is different. That's like claiming to be an expert in English just because you've always enjoyed reading. There are a few basics that a first year undergraduate learns that would serve you well. I noticed you had no grasp of the concepts as soon as i started reading here.

      You talk about what Amaral discovered 12 years ago id the open and shut case. Then you suggest i read the book. I've asked you more than once : why don't the combined forces read it instead of taking the tax payers money for nothing every year.

      You say that keeping it open for 12 years is evidence that the investigation is live. Nonsense. Besides, they don't need 12 years to read the book of secrets to cracking the case do they ?

      The meeting of two prosecution services needn't have taken place. It's the 21st century. There are emails and telephones now.Each team know what constitutes a strong case.

      ''The idea that the evidence collected by the original investigation has been discarded, is ludicrous. ''

      Is it ? Why ? I point at 12 years of no arrests or action as my argument. What do you point to ?

      So the PJ re-opened the files in 2011 because-according to their earlier statement- they must have new evidence. It's 2019 now.That suggest no new evidence.That means no old evidence and no new evidence and no suspects.No evidence that can withstand a counter argument from a forensic witness for the defence.All adds up to zilch.

      ''You are among those always looking for reasons to accuse the police of lying or obstructing justice. Sorry, but again you are projecting.''

      Another day, another mention of projecting.And as usual it makes no sense. For the record, police who destroy or doctor evidence or perjur themselves are obstructing justice. That's just the way it is.Was the judge 'projecting' when he sentenced Amaral ?

      The McCanns dreams are more likely to be about justice or closure. What happens to Amaral isn't as important. He is only important in his own eyes and the eyes of the lunatics who have mistaken this Inspector Clouseau character for Sherlock Holmes.He stopped mattering in 2007 when he tidied up his desk.

      Delete
    19. A book is not a prosecution case 13:10. As we speak there are detectives here and in Portugal who are putting together a much weightier case for the prosecution. And I am sure it will be a lot more than 800 or so pages.

      '…..12 years and no arrests, what do you point to?'. Again, the fact that there are two LIVE investigations and the determination of the police to solve this case. They are not giving up, although it seems the parents have. If they had nothing the files would be shelved.

      I don't have the time or inclination to explain projecting to you, try to look beyond your navel. People who lie, accuse other people of lying. See Donald Trump, fake news etc. They actually throw out lying accusations willy nilly, because lying is so natural to them, they believe everyone does it.

      As for your final paragraph, 'He stopped mattering in 2007 when he tidied up his desk', is actually laugh out loud funny. Really? So why did they spend on their millions on suing him in every Court in Portugal. Just the mention of his name sends them apoplectic, see the number and content of comments to this blog!

      Kudos for the bravado, though pretending it doesn't matter is yet another unnecessary lie. Admitting it does matter would be the honest answer, and it might even elicit sympathy.

      Delete
    20. It is worth repeating that if you do something, or study something for 10,000 hours you become an expert. I'm presently learning how to draw little wings at the end of my eyeliner, which means I am presently having to make up my face like Cleopatra (gone wrong)every day in order to build up those hours!

      But I digress, I mention the 10,000 hours theory because it is one of those handy facts worth knowing and to counter the sarcasm in the opening paragraph of 13:10. The 10,000 hours can apply to anything, keeping a ball in the air only using your feet, playing snooker, learning ancient Greek, baking the perfect cake, knitting the perfect hat. All it takes is 10,000 hours!

      As mentioned above, my interest in psychology began at a very early age. My dad was a psychiatric nurse, should add an enlightened psychiatric nurse, and it was a subject we often discussed.

      I once did a Diploma course in psychology at Goldsmiths University, which of course introduced me to a lot of new books of my own. But it was basic psychology, the non cool side, the technicalities if you, rather than the abnormal psychology I was looking for. Pop psychology if you like, I was very young.

      Since then I have read every book that interests me. The meaning of life can be found in books on any subject, from the self-help section of the book shop 'To Kill a Mocking Bird' to 'Catcher in the Rye' to Shakespeare, even to the bible. All attempt to give meaning to our lives.

      At a basic level psychoanalyzing a crime is quite easy. Most heinous killers are the product of seriously dysfunctional homes. Blame the mother, blame the father.

      But then there are psychopaths who appear to have gone through life having everything given to them on plate. Comfortable, loving homes, and 'normal' siblings. Then it becomes far more complex. Only child? lost in a sea of brothers and sisters? Spoilt as the youngest child? Attention seeking from the one in the middle? It confuses the nature .v. nurture argument considerably.

      But I am not yet ready to do any psychological evaluations, those I will put in my book when the censorship is lifted. Of course that won't happen until Operation Grange reveals it's conclusions, when I'm sure all bets will be off.

      Delete
    21. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton19 February 2019 at 13:33

      ''A book is not a prosecution case 13:10. As we speak there are detectives here and in Portugal who are putting together a much weightier case for the prosecution. And I am sure it will be a lot more than 800 or so pages.''

      For 12 million quid I expect it to make War and Peace look like a foreword...

      You're doing it again aren't you, Bella. You're articulating your fantasies and trying to make it sound as though they're factual information. You're passing on you guesses and dressing them as fact. Can you show me any evidence that that's happening ? If so, I'll take that back.

      Where is the evidence that the police are so 'determined' ? Madeleine's 16th birthday is a couple of months away. And nothing. We only hear that they ask for more money.

      ''People who lie, accuse other people of lying.''

      Thanks for the blah blah. If I accuse anyone of lying I offer them a chance to prove my accusation wrong.If all available evidence of a situation points to lies, i do the same.

      ''Just the mention of his name sends them apoplectic, see the number and content of comments to this blog!''

      The mention of his name should send them apoplectic. This is a man who staggered around a crime scene doing nothing and then was removed from the case because they knew he had a no-win court case heading his way.But he publicly accused the parents who had lost their little girl of burying her and lying. hadn't they suffered enough.You wouldn't understand. There's a high level of empathy required.

      ''Kudos for the bravado, though pretending it doesn't matter is yet another unnecessary lie.''

      I didn't say it didn't matter. I said he didn't.You lied.You 'fake newsed'.

      Delete
    22. I'm afraid it would take more than 10,000 hours to get the degree in the bag followed by a doctorate.That's what would be required for you to be able to speak about or write about psychological profiling. Cracker has much to answer for.But as an inspiration, I'd recommend you read Jigsaw Man by Paul Britton.

      Unfortunately, in the 90s, the success of 'Cracker' inspired thousands of people of all ages to take up Psychology. They didn't realise that the series was 85% drama and entertainment and 15% Psychology. The real hard work and tedious statistical analyses take years. It's mind numbing.I wish i had a pound for every time i heard someone say they were going to be a forensic psychologist back then. That's the danger of thinking TV characters and stories are real. I can see the attraction. It's interesting stuff.But the final 'show' that reaches the screen is the tip of a big iceberg.That big iceberg is hard work.But it has to be done.

      I'm impressed by documentaries such as 'The Tears Of A Crime'. The mini team who freeze frame facial expressions and pieces of audio and so on.But I'd be more impressed if they didn't just use headline convicts who had been found guilty and jailed.Use the skills beforehand, That's more impressive.Hindsight's always 20/20...

      I confess that I've constructed profiles of people for years as well as crimes.I'm pretty damn good too.I've even had a go on the McCann case.It's strange that the material is so sparse considering the media coverage and time it's been open.But there's enough there for a decent effort.I have my suspicions...

      If you intend to base a book on any kind of profiling without the credentials, I'd read up on some big cases and the conclusions of a few major figures in the area and cite them. Otherwise you'll be on the wrong end of a critical ambush.

      OG ? Don't hold your breath. They've left it far too long.They can only say sorry now and leave it on the cold list.The only mystery is why they haven't been told to already rather than allow them to spend tax money.

      Delete
    23. Anonymous 20 February 2019 at 03:30

      “But as an inspiration, I'd recommend you read Jigsaw Man by Paul Britton.”

      An opinion (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/549894.The_Jigsaw_Man ):

      “An appalling, self-serving book full of pop-psychology and in some cases downright false claims. For instance, Britton tries to play down his role in the investigation of Colin Stagg in the Wimbledon Common Murder case, despite the fact that he was advising the police even while they were interviewing Stagg at the time of his first arrest.

      Colin Stagg has since been proven innocent through DNA testing which proved that the real killer was Robert Napper. Interestingly, Britton claims IN THIS BOOK that he was specifically asked if the Wimbledon Common Murder was the work of the same killer as that of Samantha and Jazmine Bisset (who were also killed by Napper). Britton said - AND HE ADMITS THIS IN THIS VERY BOOK - that the killings were clearly different. He got that one wrong then.”

      W-t-P

      Delete
    24. My interest in psychology didn't begin with Cracker, it began in the 1960's with horrendously cruel women of the cloth who battered small children. I needed to know why they behaved as they did and why they employed psychopaths as lay staff.

      My 10,000 hours began over 50 years ago and has been repeated many times over. I eventually found the real reason for the dysfunctional behaviour of those nuns and lay staff who had care of us, many years later when studying the Zimbardo experiment. That was it, they were the guards, and we kids were the prisoners, and it was probably replicated in kids institutions everywhere.

      You say you have experience of constructing profiles of people - as a hobby presumably. Unless of course, you are the one who drew up the profile of Robert Murat for CEOP, and managed to bring the internet into the equation.

      Up until your final paragraph you were doing quite well, patronising of course, but not the usual batshit crazy. Then you went and spoilt it all by dismissing OG with a cursory nothing to see here.

      Where is the logic in giving a non investigation where a few detectives are just sitting around, 150k every six months? Give me one, just one, credible reason for keeping the investigation going if the goal is to shelve it without bringing charges?

      As you said, it is tax money, ergo it is money that must be accounted for. It can't be hidden, it can't be written off, and it can be put under intense scrutiny.

      There is no such thing as 'too long' for heinous crimes 03:30, there are no time limits in which to bring a prosecution. The idea that OG 'can only say sorry now and leave it on the cold list', is pure fantasy or wishful thinking on your part. If that were their only option they would have taken it years ago.

      The continued funding demonstrates the determination of OG, they are not giving up, though it seems many on the McCann side would like them to.

      Delete
    25. You want evidence that OG are building a case for prosecution. Err, they are police detectives, that is what police detectives do. It's their job.

      Evidence that the police are so determined? They haven't given up, they have continued to ask for more funding. If they had given up on solving the case, they would have shelved it years ago and they certainly wouldn't have been given any more funding.

      You accuse me of lack of empathy because I do not hate GA as you do, totally illogical. As a manic depressive I have too much empathy! I cried along with Sara Payne, Coral Jones and every parent who has lost a child. But you are right, I have never felt it for Kate and Gerry. If they were advised to articulate a cool, articulate exterior, they were wrong to take that advice, it alienated thousands.

      With all the water that has gone under the bridge, I don't know why you and all the Ziggys still get so worked about Goncalo Amaral. Since his book, even the British police have suggested Madeleine is dead. Will they now sue them? All their claims, no-one will search for Madeleine etc, have come to fruition, not because of GA's book, but because of the course of time.

      To claim the psychological damage caused by a book is greater than the psychological damage caused by the loss of their child, sounds even more distasteful 12 years on. That they still want compensation for it is grotesque.

      Delete
    26. The damage caused by Amaral is what I'm talking about, not his whodunnit nonsense. He has fomented so much irrational hatred to the parents who lost their little girl. He has intentionally formed an online army of lunatics. Yet between them all nobody can produce anything that would support an arrest of the parents. many of the lunatics have 'problems' shall we say. One of those problems is their inability to control themselves.That places the parents in potential danger. The parents have two other children-doesn't anyone remember that ? To have to look over your shoulder wherever you are is disgraceful. If you have been found guilty of doing something terrible then it's understandable to a degree.But they haven't. Trying to silence the man behind it all is normal.Trying to have a court make him back up his accusations or withdraw them is normal.If one of the tactics is to go the fiscal route then so be it.But you call their exercising of their human rights to live in peace and free of harassment wrong-or 'grotesque'.But you fully endorse the haranguing of two people who lost their child and you try to coax thousands to join in. Evidence and proof are dirty words now. They spoil the fun. Innocent until proven guilty is a thing of the past as well until the McCanns are punished-then we can re-introduce it afterwards.

      Delete
    27. ''Where is the logic in giving a non investigation where a few detectives are just sitting around, 150k every six months? Give me one, just one, credible reason for keeping the investigation going if the goal is to shelve it without bringing charges? ''

      Because the crime has been covered up from 2007. OG fools the gullible into believing there are detectives beavering away behind closed doors with a fine-tooth comb and burning the midnight oil ( for at least & years now). How much detail is there to comb through ? How many statements and suspects ? We've had a handful in 12 years we all knew would go nowhere.There is nothing- zilch- coming back for the tax payers money. If I'm wrong we'll get the announcement won't we.The results of all that 'hard police work'. If I'm right we'll hear nothing and have to come online to see if anyone's guesses sound interesting. If they OG spokesperson ( ie-he with the short straw in hand) was to be doorstepped right now he'd have nothing.Are they just keeping the shop open in the hope somebody comes in with new evidence ? It looks like.Is the money spent being wasted ? It looks like.Is there an alternative to putting the case on the cold list ? Yes- keep OG open, take the cash, and give the impression that everything's too 'hush hush and sensitive' to go public with. Every year.

      Your blind faith is blind faith. That's what keeps religion thriving. Blind faith is worthless. Pointless .

      Delete
    28. If you believe the only reason the McCanns are still free is because they have received cast iron protection, then who is protecting them ? And how can OG A, not see it and B, take the protection away ? Over to you, Ros.

      Delete
    29. Anonymous20 February 2019 at 09:19

      Not sure what you're intention was there, Winnifred. I'm guessing gallantry. No matter....

      When Ros said she had gone for a softer option and i reminded her that to speak with any authority of the area you would need the degree and the doctorate after, i suggested what i considered a compromise. It's a far more accessible book than one that goes into more detail and uses far more academic language( third year degree) 'Criminal Shadows' by David Canter.

      The book i recommended is far from self-serving and details actual real cases that we are all familiar with and which Britton was called in to help investigate. That's another reason i recommended it. The book pre-dates the Wimbledon Common case by the way. And the tabloid treatment of that and of Britton was the reason for the controversy and bad publicity.No surprise there. Stagg was caught in a police 'honey trap' and he was the wrong man. Britton was blamed. But Britton gave them a profile, not a name and no advice as to how to 'trap' anyone. The police took the profile and then found a 'fit' and came up with the honey trap idea themselves. Hence Britton wasn't charged with anything. But, as far as I know, he has never commented on the McCann case whereas, best seller of tack, Pat Brown ( to name one ) has-and still does. She thinks the parents 'did it'. So, lets hear it for pulp fiction.

      In future i'll refrain from suggesting books if i think they're good or useful unless it's yet another one talking about ( yawn) dogs not lying...

      Delete
    30. Howtheydunnit, not whodunnit.

      Again, this is where it is clear you have not read GA's book. He is very sympathetic in his words about the parents, Kate especially.

      'He has intentionally formed an online army of lunatics'. Wow, that's quite a sweeping statement there. Actually, GA has steered clear of all the websites and discussions in his name. Most 'online armies' began long before anyone knew GA's name, when all they had to go on was the very peculiar behaviour of the parents. GA has neither intentionally formed or led any online army.

      Your next accusation that people who do not believe the abduction story must have something wrong with them, is not only absurd, it's insulting. The only defence the McCanns seem to have is 'it's your fault for not believing me'. But just as we on here and other websites have kept and framed all those lies, so too have the investigators, plus I am sure a lot more beside.

      The McCanns have had ample opportunity to prove their innocence and to rebut GA's theory. Why haven't they? Why haven't they gone on TV and opened up completely about that holiday. There must be so much more to tell.

      It is a bit like Dorothy and her ruby slippers, the McCanns have had the power to clear themselves all along. When you are innocent, there are thousands of ways to prove it, telling your side, as GA did is one way.

      I don't agree it is normal for former suspects to sue former detectives. The only other example I can think of is the Ramseys, the parents of Jonbenet.

      GA isn't haranguing the parents. He wrote a book telling his side of the story. It is they who have kept that book in the public eye for 10 years by suing him, relentlessly. They were and still are the protagonists. I doubt GA even thinks about them these days.

      Nowhere in my blog am I coaxing people to harangue the parents. Not believing the parents does not make me a vigilante. I advocate civility, sympathy and understanding even for those who don't deserve it. We are not savages.

      When the McCanns put out fake news, I rebut it. I'm reactive rather than proactive. It galls me that the media in the UK will not report on the Madeleine story, honestly and fairly. GA's side of the story has still not had the coverage it deserves, we here in the UK cannot pick it up from the bookshops.

      To me this is an abomination! I despise the word 'ban' and I despise the word 'censorship'. Who-tf has the right to tell me what I can and can't read. (OK I can see where the arrogant accusations come from). But, how dare they!

      Your head is truly screwed up if you believe Goncalo Amaral is the sinister leader of an online army [of lunatics] trained to harangue the McCanns. In the cold light of day it goes beyond paranoia and straight into batshit crazy.

      Delete
    31. I don't believe the McCanns have caste iron protection, I don't think they have any protection at all. They certainly received special treatment in the early days, but that came to a halt in July 2007, though not entirely, because they still had the Secret Services accompanying them when they returned to Rothley in September. Operation Grange, I guess, will have to determine what the special treatment entailed.

      As I said, I don't think they have any protection left. Beyond their Fund that is. Legal bills eat up millions, and I suspect Gerry and Kate are coping with an avalanche of them. They can't legally gag anyone anymore.

      Operation Grange has done nothing to divert the suspicion and blame away from the McCanns. Nothing GA has said has had the visual impact of digging machinery and cadaver dogs in PDL. If the objective of OG is to clear the parents, they are doing a terrible job.

      Delete
    32. 'Because the crime has been covered up from 2007'

      That's it is it? Your reasoned argument for the Home Office continuing to fund Operation Grange. It's nearly as bad as 'because we always do it that way', but not quite.

      Just because you haven't seen the ending doesn't mean the ending isn't coming. You are a bit ahead of yourself in declaring Operation have found nothing, they haven't told us what they have found, but they will. They may even have found an abductor, have you never considered that?

      Delete
    33. Hi anon 20 February 2019 at 13:57

      "The parents have two other children-doesn't anyone remember that ?"

      Yes, Kate and Gerry have many times reminded us about that. They've, as a matter of fact, even used them as a shield against those who question their innocence. Kate has explicitly said that the reason as to why she started to keep a diary, and then wrote a whole book about what she claims happened to Madeleine, was to give their surviving children an account of the truth. One must of course ask why, as it would've been so much easier to speak directly to them, why not a few times every year till they eventually understand how innocent their parents are.

      There's,however, one very dark side of this tragedy, not so much discussed, and that's about children's intuition and sense of truth. They almost always know much more about what happens around them than parents imagine.

      So if the Mccanns are guilty (neither you nor I can know that they are or are not), their twins must have figured out that many years ago, and who can protect them from their nightmares, if that would be the case.

      Delete
    34. "So if the Mccanns are guilty (neither you nor I can know that they are or are not), their twins must have figured out that many years ago, and who can protect them from their nightmares, if that would be the case."

      Using that logic, the fact that neither of the twins have spoken with anyone; schoolfriends, friends, family or others, suggesting their parent's guilt, then we must presume that they have indeed figured out what happened. It would appear that they believe their parents to be innocent.

      Delete
    35. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton20 February 2019 at 15:36

      ''They can't legally gag anyone anymore.''

      So ? Apart from Crazy Horse Amaral, there's only people talking online. They don't need to gag anyone.

      ''Operation Grange has done nothing to divert the suspicion and blame away from the McCanns''

      If I had a biscuit to hand I'd give you it. Well done. You're seeing glimpses of the real remit of OG.

      '' Nothing GA has said has had the visual impact of digging machinery and cadaver dogs in PDL''

      Oh, I don't know about that really. How about all the empty holes they caused. Or the pictures of the strange Murat boy hiding his face as he was dragged in for questioning the second time.

      ''That's it is it? Your reasoned argument for the Home Office continuing to fund Operation Grange.''

      Pretty much yep. Why would all those PMs, politicians and intelligence officers want to take over the matter ? Ideas ?

      ''You are a bit ahead of yourself in declaring Operation have found nothing, they haven't told us what they have found''

      I know what they've found. They've found a nifty way of extracting money from the home office.

      ''They may even have found an abductor, have you never considered that? ''

      No. They can only hold a suspect for 48 hours without charging him. Not 48 years. But, you never know, they might have found him in 2007 and found out why the abduction took place.

      Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton20 February 2019 at 15:09

      '''He has intentionally formed an online army of lunatics'. Wow, that's quite a sweeping statement there''

      It's also true. There's endless videos of them ranting without reason and there's endless arguments on forums and social media. There's no regard to the evidence and proof.There's no regard for the parents who may well have had their child stolen. Who do they quote more than anyone ?

      ''Your next accusation that people who do not believe the abduction story must have something wrong with them, is not only absurd, it's insulting''

      It's true. They refuse to believe it because there's no proof.Often there's no proof left at a burglary. But they happened. Where's the proof of 'no abduction' and 'she died' ? Tell the police-not me.

      ''The McCanns have had ample opportunity to prove their innocence and to rebut GA's theory.''

      When you are accused, the onus is with the accuser to prove it.Not the accused.This is wisdom- don't be frightened...

      Delete
    36. ''It is a bit like Dorothy and her ruby slippers, the McCanns have had the power to clear themselves all along.''

      They were never charged so had no need to clear themselves of anything. What do you think they needed to clear themselves of ? Internet nuttiness ? Nope...

      ''Nowhere in my blog am I coaxing people to harangue the parents''

      It's everywhere.

      ''When the McCanns put out fake news, I rebut it. I'm reactive rather than proactive. ''

      Ever thought of proving that it's fake ?


      '' Your head is truly screwed up if you believe Goncalo Amaral is the sinister leader of an online army [of lunatics] trained to harangue the McCanns. In the cold light of day it goes beyond paranoia and straight into batshit crazy.''

      A couple of points....

      We often witness your mind having sneezing fits on here. You come back and tell us of your bi polar or manic depression or how Nuns did this or that and scarred you. This is the cocktail we're supposed to drink and believe as the cause for a streak in you that wants to insult or attack anyone who A-disagrees with you or B- asks you to back your points up. it's not nice.The refusal to answer questions or explain your 'truths' and your tantrums give a vivid impression of you being a mendacious harpy. You have so many unpleasant personalities that if you ever threatened suicide the police would treat it as a hostage situation. Be nicer. failing that, be more sensible.

      Delete
    37. They were made arguidos. Suspects. That cloud of suspicion has never left them. Both Leicester Police and the Portuguese Supreme Court pointed out that neither Gerry nor Kate were cleared.

      If they were cleared they could still be living as they were in the summer of 2007. Speaking with PMs on the phone and arranging annual Madeleine Days and they would be appearing frequently on our TV screens. Where is the confidence they had in the Expresso interview?

      LOL, if I were the unpleasant mendacious harpy you claim I am, I wouldn't have a fraction of the readers I have now. Followers of the Madeleine case flock here because they know they will find honesty. I don't make grandiose claims of solving the case. I muse, I express my opinions, I challenge the nonsense put out by Tracey Kandhola.

      True my writing is filled with anecdotes and memories, but that is my writing style and it has always proved popular. I can't suppress my inner teacher, I always like to pass on everything I learn.

      Where have I refused to answer your questions? I've answered all of them, you just don't like the answers. I believe OG are constantly topped up because they are onto something. You don't.

      Finally, after a post filled with insults and lurid allegations you sign off by advising me to be nicer! Failing that, be more sensible. Wtf does that mean? If I were sensible your vicious posts would be in my spam box.

      Delete
    38. 'Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton20 February 2019 at 19:29

      ''They were made arguidos. Suspects. That cloud of suspicion has never left them. Both Leicester Police and the Portuguese Supreme Court pointed out that neither Gerry nor Kate were cleared.''

      How does this scenario sound :

      Person1 '' Have you been charged then ?''

      Person 2'' Yes''

      Person 1 ; ''What with ?'''

      Person 2 : ''Being under suspicion''

      Bit mental that isn't it.The suspects were not charged with anything. Later they were declared as 'NOT suspects'. That's the official state of things. Deny it all you like.Life goes on at Camp McCann. Unfortunately the Internet Squad have become trapped in 2007 like thousands of Sam Tylers :)

      Why would they need to be speaking to PMs now ? Or the media ? It's all been said.

      ''LOL, if I were the unpleasant mendacious harpy you claim I am, I wouldn't have a fraction of the readers I have now.''

      I suppose the same could be said with other bloggers and youtube botherers.What is your opinion of former potential beau, Mr Bennet ? That site he runs is the biggest isn't it ? It's not a good point any way. You provide a safe place for like minded vigilantes and they won't complain will they. Those who like a balanced sensible debate almost never read or contribute.It's obvious why. I was hoping I could encourage a few but they must be somewhere else.

      '' I don't make grandiose claims of solving the case. I muse, I express my opinions''

      You don't muse you try to instruct and dictate.You offer plenty of opinions yet refuse to accept that your opinions can be challenged by others.If asked to support your opinion you don't. You merely offer one of your interpretations and, as it's yours, you think can be taken as law.You remind us just how many years you've been studying the case as though it's a qualification. You've studied it briefly as a whole but focused like a laser beam on the parents and tried to will your theories into life. Bizarre.

      ''I can't suppress my inner teacher, I always like to pass on everything I learn. ''

      Good idea. Me too. But do yourself and them a favour. Wait until you KNOW something's right before you pass it on as true.

      ''Finally, after a post filled with insults and lurid allegations you sign off by advising me to be nicer! Failing that, be more sensible. Wtf does that mean?''

      It means be nicer or at least more sensible.It's no good trying to paint a picture of some middle -class Hyacinth Bucket with room for a pony and barrel of chablis and then spew out the kind of anger and language we're only used to hearing if we walk past a pub on the dock road.

      Delete
    39. What a deeply unpleasant person you are 19:02, is that you Gerry?

      Ah the biscuit, I see what you did there, you are implying I am a dog. Does it make your argument any more believable? I'm guessing not. In fact I am guessing regular people are wincing at your ungallant words.

      'Strange Murat boy', what a strange way to describe Robert Murat. It is pretty derogatory to call a grown man a boy, a bit like those racist cops in the Heat of the Night, or They call me Mr. Tibbs' if you prefer. It says much about your character.

      Nobody is ranting without reason. At the end of that paragraph you had a slip up, what do you mean 'they MAY well have had their child taken'. Only now you have doubts?

      Finally, you claim it is not on the accused to clear themselves. OK. But they have to live with that suspicion every day of their lives if they don't. They lost their chance to prove their innocence when the original investigation was ongoing, and they lost every media opportunity since, to speak honestly and openly about what happened.

      As for the wisdom jibe, sarcasm just isn't funny.

      Delete
    40. Anonymous20 February 2019 at 19:01

      '' the fact that neither of the twins have spoken with anyone; schoolfriends, friends, family or others, suggesting their parent's guilt, then we must presume that they have indeed figured out what happened. It would appear that they believe their parents to be innocent.''

      It's hard to consider what thoughts are in the minds of two complete strangers we have never met or read about. If they haven't spoken with family or friends or others about a specific thing then what do we have to go on if we need to make an assumption about their thoughts ? At the most basic level, they have no reason to suspect their parents are guilty of anything if they have never been arrested or questioned since 2007. It's a shame that two kids who are now teens probably daren't stray too fa from home or speak with anyone online for fear of the thousands of idiots wasting their life stalking the McCanns for anything they can grab and use.

      Delete
    41. ''Finally, after a post filled with insults and lurid allegations''

      Lurid allegations and insults or merely some musings..Anyway- I thought you loved insults and lurid allegations. You've erected a blog for them to be stored and enjoyed..

      Delete
    42. Björn20 February 2019 at 17:45

      '' she started to keep a diary, and then wrote a whole book about what she claims happened to Madeleine, was to give their surviving children an account of the truth. One must of course ask why, as it would've been so much easier to speak directly to them''

      You spend so much time at the bottom of the barrel, bjorn, you might as well live in it. So, by your logic-who needs to keep a diary if they can just tell people what they've been doing and thinking or feeling. The diary could be viewed as quite touching to normal people. Ask one.

      ''There's,however, one very dark side of this tragedy, not so much discussed, and that's about children's intuition and sense of truth. They almost always know much more about what happens around them than parents imagine.''

      And here we are again. Children and 'darkness' in the same sentence. We must be in Bjorn's barrel. The children were how old in 2007 ? One ? Now you want to imagine, and help us believe , that 'children's intuition' will expose the guilt of the McCanns to their twins. Sick. If you're right-and let's face it- you rarely are if ever, then why haven't they run for their lives ?

      ''their twins must have figured out that many years ago, and who can protect them from their nightmares''

      They don't need protecting. It's only happening in your head.You need protecting.

      Delete
  9. So Ros, do you condone the use of violence in police interrogations?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do not condone the use of violence in any situation.

      Delete
    2. Is it just perjury you condone then ?

      Delete
    3. Where have I said I condone perjury 01:13? Oh, that's right, nowhere.

      But if you want to go down the perjury road, a flick through the transcripts of the witnesses for the McCanns in the civil actions, you will find plenty there. Mostly given by people who hadn't read the book. Then there was Gerry's last minute plea direct to the Judge, Dogs Do Lie!

      Delete
    4. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton18 February 2019 at 15:02

      ''Where have I said I condone perjury 01:13? Oh, that's right, nowhere. ''

      Where did i suggest you said you did ? It was a question. Don't you understand simple questions ?

      ''But if you want to go down the perjury road, a flick through the transcripts of the witnesses for the McCanns in the civil actions, you will find plenty there''

      Will I find anyone who has been charged and subsequently found guilty in a court of law, as Amaral was ?

      Delete
    5. I'm sure you will one day soon 18:33, but I expect it will be like the Trump investigation, all the big names will be rounded up on the same day. I foresee a day when I will have to choose what to watch, the Trump trials or the trials of those responsible for Madeleine's disappearance and for perverting the course of justice. I admit, I will be torn.

      Delete
    6. ''I'm sure you will one day soon 18:33,''

      The statements are all there unedited and have been there for 12 years.Almost as long as Amaral's actual conviction.

      '' I foresee a day when I will have to choose what to watch, the Trump trials or the trials of those responsible for Madeleine's disappearance and for perverting the course of justice. I admit, I will be torn.''

      No, not torn. Asleep.That's where dreams are.

      Delete
    7. ….. and a nightmare for you. Don't you want those responsible for Madeleine's disappearance brought to justice? Isn't that what you have been campaigning for all these years?

      Delete
    8. Unfortunately< i have a life that doesn't allow any room for campaigning for anything, least of all something that doesn't effect me or my family. Yes, I'd love to see justice. Especially when the victim of a crime was a helpless child. I'll raise a glass if it ever happens, and I'm tee total. But I've never believed it wold happen since May 2007. Too many 'non-police' forces went to work in it.And that's never going to bring a result. It's clear that that rank of people with that level of interest willing to spend that kind of money over this span of time are NOT looking to arrest civilians.

      Delete
    9. "I do not condone the use of violence in any situation."

      GA does. Even when that violence is against women.

      Delete
  10. GA is a good, kind and diligent man, and nobody will ever sway me from that view. The MCcannns must be hopping mad that their 'sardine muncher' turned out to be so literate and intelligent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Pity because you need to take your rose coloured spectacles off & get yourself off for an eye test sharpish if what you read about Amaral leads you to believe he is an honest & diligent & kindly man.


      He has lied throughout his life it would appear & his lies caught up with him & he was charged with perjury. That was for wrong he committed in another missing child case before Madeleine disappeared.


      The question must be asked why he was ever allowed within a hundred miles of this case after the previous missing child case & the outcome?

      Delete
    2. It begs the question of why and how so many people here can condone a trusted officer to commit perhury in such a tragic case. I don't know which is worse, that he did it or this lot call him a hero.

      Delete
    3. ''The MCcannns must be hopping mad that their 'sardine muncher' turned out to be so literate and intelligent.''

      Or that he speaks complete rubbish so eloquently and gets away with it.But there'll always be a big market for BS. The dead heads are everywhere.

      Amaral's greatest achievement was to identify a vast audience of gullible herders.Herders who would promote his book of opinions and guesses as actual fact and defend it as such.He speaks complete rubbish so eloquently and gets away with it.But there'll always be a big market for BS. The dead heads are everywhere.His book doesn't appeal to those who enjoy a challenge to their comprehension skills.

      Delete
    4. The gullible are the people who sanctioned its officers to look into drains supposedly looking for Madeleine some 7 yrs after her reported disappearance,as if a skeleton or even a live child was waiting just waiting to be discovered.Smithman never had time to put her body down there.I know the brief says as if the abduction took place in the uk,and by logic what would follow would be best practices, but that was stretching it a bit especially in a foreign country.Still c'est la vie and all that.

      Delete
    5. Anonymous 18 February 2019 at 01:04

      “His book doesn't appeal to those who enjoy a challenge to their comprehension skills.”

      Mon Seigneur says it ‘cos I is a bear with little brain?

      W-t-P

      Delete
    6. just because it's true, wtp

      Delete
    7. Anonymous17 February 2019 at 19:36

      ''GA is a good, kind and diligent man, and nobody will ever sway me from that view''

      Good for you. May you never sober up.

      Delete
    8. No-one knows better than Clarence Mitchell that 'there'll always be a big market for BS', it could even be his catch phrase.

      GA wasn't selling bullshit. He was telling his side of a story he was directly involved in. His book is corroborated by the official police files, so it is clearly not BS.

      And wtf do you mean by dead heads? You think it makes you sound cool but it doesn't. It makes you sound like one of those right wing psychos who shave their heads and cover themselves in piercings and tattoos.

      The people who read and comment here are very much alive and on the ball. Those who try to look like hard men actually look cowardly and immature. Call me a dead head to my face, using your face. Nah, can't do it? Too chicken.

      Delete
    9. "His book is corroborated by the official police files."

      Probably most of those police files were written by him!! Anyway, the public prosecutor decided there was insufficent evidence to proceed against anyone in the case. If a trial would have gone ahead and the McCanns had been found guilty, I think that no-one would have blinked if Amaral had written about the case. However, why he decided to write a book with his allegations, when the public prosecutor and other independent police and judiciary had decided there was insufficient evidence to charge anyone, I can only guess.

      Delete
    10. If the police files corroborate Amaral's 'whodunnit' nonsense why wasn't that enough to prosecute or even arrest anyone ? Well, Ros ?

      Delete
    11. 'The Truth of the Lie's is not a 'whodunnit', it is more of a 'howtheydidit'.

      'Why wasn't that enough to prosecute or even arrest anyone?' I think the McCanns and their friends return to the UK and their refusal to co-operate with the Portuguese police led to the case being shelved. The PJ made it absolutely clear they needed the group to return to PDL for a reconstruction. They had checked out everything and everyone else, all that was left was the Tapas group.

      It is possible that the incumbent government, New Labour, may have pressured the Portuguese not to prosecute the group. However, it could be argued that the McCanns and the Tapas group's decision not to co-operate with the police, was nothing to do with the VIPs who may have interfered. The case could literally not go any further 22:35, and you would be amazed at how often that happens. Crucially, the Portuguese police were no longer searching for Madeleine.

      Delete
    12. Do you think that a group suspected of killing and burying a child can refuse to speak to the police or stage a reconstruction and just be left to get on with their life ? You think that all investigations stall there and then until they all change their mind-no matter how many years it takes ? Have you even the slightest idea of how ludicrous that sounds ? By your reasoning(lol) all suspects arrested for a crime need to do in future is refuse to answer questions and they're free.

      Delete
    13. Incredible isn't it 10:59? But suspects cannot be forced to talk which is why so many crimes take years to solve. Fortunately there are detectives out there who never give up, who leave no stone unturned. The suspects may be free, but they are not really free, they are forever in fear of that knock on the door.

      Delete
    14. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton19 February 2019 at 11:24

      ''Incredible isn't it 10:59? But suspects cannot be forced to talk which is why so many crimes take years to solve. ''

      They can be forced to talk in a trial by a judge.

      '' Fortunately there are detectives out there who never give up, who leave no stone unturned. The suspects may be free, but they are not really free, they are forever in fear of that knock on the door.''

      Wow-more heroic detectives.You watch far too many detective thrillers. So while these determined detectives wait patiently for however many years it takes, they could be allowing a murderer or rapist to get on with his life and recreational interests. No wonder there's so much crime.

      Delete
    15. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton18 February 2019 at 23:20

      'The Truth of the Lie's is not a 'whodunnit', it is more of a 'howtheydidit'.

      And yet the police haven't used it for anything.

      Delete
    16. So what does the Judge do 12:59, electrocute them with a cattle prod?

      I don't watch detective thrillers, I watch real crime docu/dramas, which are far more fascinating. I stopped watching CSI etc years ago.

      I agree it must be vexing for detectives, but they accept that cases can go cold and they do not have enough to prosecute. Sometimes new evidence can come up a decade later and from the unlikeliest sources, prison inmates who talk to each other for example.

      Some families of victims who have gone missing or who have been murdered, pressure the police relentlessly until they re-open their files. Many families and detectives form bonds, the detectives feel duty bound to assist them. I have seen numerous cases where a murderer is left to get on with his life and recreational interests. Some men who have murdered their wives go on to marry other wives, there is nothing the police can do about it. They are just waiting for the opportunity to arrest them, no matter how long it takes.

      Why are you so scornful of detectives may I ask? Aren't you happy that detectives are still looking for Madeleine?

      Delete
    17. Anonymous 19 February 2019 at 12:59

      They [suspects] can be forced to talk in a trial by a judge.

      How? Waterboarding?

      W-t-P

      Delete
    18. With an instruction. ''you will answer the question'' etc.

      Delete
    19. ''Why are you so scornful of detectives may I ask? Aren't you happy that detectives are still looking for Madeleine?''

      I'm scornful of them because they have done nothing. Because they get nowhere. That they only shout the media when they want funding for more nothing. They should tell the public why this case is so 'complex' and let us try and keep a straight face. Chief Superintendent Stevie Wonder is not bringing home the bacon in this case and there' no reason to expect that to change. They're a gang of chancers.

      Delete
    20. Anonymous 19 February 2019 at 18:05

      “With an instruction. ''you will answer the question'' etc.”

      A suspect/accused/defendant has the right to remain silent.

      W-t-P

      Delete
  11. Ros believes Gancalo Amaral is a hero because he's a good writer, it can't be because he solved the case.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 17 February 2019 at 20:12

      Perhaps Dr Amaral’s qualities as a human being are what Ros really appreciates. I do.

      Winnie-the-Pooh

      Delete
    2. Neither of you know the man.But qualities such as tact and diplomacy would help sell that myth more effectively.Integrity would help too.

      Delete
    3. Err, he did solve the case 20:12, his conclusions are found in The Truth of the Lie. Actually, he is the only cop, official or unofficial to put forward a credible theory. A theory where the evidence and the timelines fit the empty spaced in the jigsaw puzzle. You say he didn't solve it because you do not agree with him.

      In all these years, Goncalo's theory hasn't been disproved by anyone. And dozens, if not hundreds, have tried. There has never been any solid proof that Madeleine was abducted. I note the police and media now use 'disappeared' rather than abducted. All they have are the 'two' sightings on the night, one of which they have ruled out, and one who looks very much like the father.

      Twelve years and no abductor does not bode well for the McCanns. Without an abductor, their story falls to pieces. The lack of an abductor is probably behind the massive fall in their popularity.

      Are Scotland Yard and the PJ even looking for an abductor anymore? It doesn't look as though they are, their team has been cut down to the minimum and the end is near. No sign of them cracking down on any trafficking or paedophile gangs, no sign of them searching for a live child.

      Delete
    4. "A theory where the evidence and the timelines fit the empty spaced in the jigsaw puzzle."

      Erm, well. if you're going to suggest such things as switched cremations and bodies interred down wells, then you're eventually going to find a theory where the evidence and the timelines fit the empty spaces in the jigsaw puzzle.

      Delete
    5. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton18 February 2019 at 20:38
      ''
      Err, he did solve the case 20:12, his conclusions are found in The Truth of the Lie.''

      Err, what have they been funding since he solved it then, Miss Marple ?

      ''he is the only cop, official or unofficial to put forward a credible theory''

      Oh, I see. You're calling a theory 'truth' again.How very novel of you. Advancing a theory isn't solving a thing. How can you not understand that ?

      ''Twelve years and no abductor does not bode well for the McCanns. Without an abductor, their story falls to pieces.''

      No, without an abductor arrested and charged, the case stays open.You're not very good at this, are you ? Have you onlny just started ?

      There are 'no signs' of anything. That's because-in my opinion- they're not doing anything. I cite 12 years of empty space to support that opinion. I think it was jolly unsporting of the abductor not to leave a selfie behind or at least a note signed with his or her fingerprint.Why didn't they do that ? Now we'll never know what happened or who sent the abductor/s. Are they looking for a live child ? Nobody knows. A dead one-same.We know what they say to the cameras and in the newspapers.And we know that means nothing-every time.

      Delete
    6. I do tend to find that writers I like are generally good eggs. Full of inspirational quotes and compassionate thinking. So many I would like to sit down and enjoy a glass of Chablis with.

      And yes WTP, it is GA's qualities as a human being that make him so awesome. Cometh the hour, cometh the man, GA was not going to kowtow to the steamroller that was approaching him.

      Delete
    7. Your post is dripping with belligerence and sarcasm, is that you Kate?

      As for GA's theory, GA's theory is that Madeleine died by accident and the parents concealed her body, the same theory put forward in the interim report on the PJ files. GA uses the evidence they found to piece together a possible scenario where Madeleine died behind the sofa where both the blood and cadaver dogs alerted. GA presented a solved case, which is of course why the McCanns have spent the last 10+ years suing him.

      You may joke about the lack of evidence left by an 'abductor', but it is no laughing matter for the parents. No abductor puts them firmly in the frame. And yes, there should have been evidence. The break in was a false flag, and the doors, curtains and gate locks were left undisturbed. The abductor it would seem, closed doors, curtains and gates behind him. How likely is it that an intruder would be so thoughtful?

      Delete
    8. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton19 February 2019 at 00:05

      ''Your post is dripping with belligerence and sarcasm, is that you Kate? ''

      No paranoia there then. Your post is dripping with nonsense that can't be cobbled together to look close to relaistic. Is that you, Goncalo ?

      Delete
    9. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton18 February 2019 at 23:27

      ''And yes WTP, it is GA's qualities as a human being that make him so awesome. Cometh the hour, cometh the man, GA was not going to kowtow to the steamroller that was approaching him. ''

      No gushing there, I see. You should spend far less time on the chablis.Not only are you sounding pretentious, you really shouldn't talk when you're drunk.It's bad enough when you're sober.

      Cometh the hour cometh the man.Hilarious. Cometh the bumbling detctive, cometh the end of his career. Cometh the liar cometh the charge of perjury.He steam rollered himself the fool.

      Delete
    10. No Chablis, just a couple of dollops of mischief. I know how much my praise of Goncalo Amaral winds you up :) Isn't awesome an awesome word btw?

      Delete
  12. As I have no 'skin in the game' or a paid shill, I read the above vitriolic attacks on ex detective Amaral and note that the very accusations of; writing a fictional book and lying can be laid against Dr. Kate 'jemmy the windows' Healey Mcann.
    Of course; Dr. Amaral never went on holiday and lost a child.
    Nor did he exercise a right to silence and refuse to answer 48 relevant police questions when his child went missing.
    Neither did he have suspicious cadaver odour on his trousers.
    He of course can walk his streets with pride. Kate is surrounded by silence, sneers and contempt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous 17 February 2019 at 21:08

      Thank you for your comment.

      “I read the above vitriolic attacks on ex detective Amaral and note that the very accusations of; writing a fictional book and lying can be laid against Dr. Kate 'jemmy the windows' Healey Mcann.”

      ‘Vitriolic’ is the word. Dr Healey McCann never mentioned jemmied shutters AFAIK. You a right about her being a lousy witness and writer.

      “.Of course; Dr. Amaral never went on holiday and lost a child”

      Indeed!

      “Nor did he exercise a right to silence and refuse to answer 48 relevant police questions when his child went missing.”

      Kate acted on her solicitor’s advice. There is nothing wrong with exercising one’s right to remain silent. Gerry answered questions.

      “Neither did he have suspicious cadaver odour on his trousers.”

      It is uncertain what the odour was.

      “He of course can walk his streets with pride.”

      I would tentatively agree with that. With everything I know about the man. I would trust him with children. Perhaps that’s just me.

      Winnie-the-Pooh

      Delete
    2. There are bank robbers who could be trusted with children.They're still bank robbers.

      Delete
    3. Hi anon18 February 2019 at 09:18

      "Kate acted on her solicitor’s advice. There's nothing wrong with exercising one’s right to remain silent. Gerry answered questions"

      Yes in a legal sense, you're of course right, but from a moral perspective, one could of course have expected more from a mother, who had lost a child just weeks earlier and claimed to be innocent. It is, however, a very common piece of advice by a defence lawyer, as it prevents his/her client from contradicting another person (Gerry) with whom the lawyer suspects his/her client has committed a crime. So Kate surely fought her corner well as Gerry said, though not so much for Madeleine, I’d like to add.




      Delete
    4. Björn18 February 2019 at 20:39

      Hi anon18 February 2019 at 09:18

      ''Yes in a legal sense, you're of course right, but from a moral perspective, one could of course have expected more from a mother, who had lost a child just weeks earlier''

      When a crime has been committed and the police are asking questions, solicitors get called-not priests and vicars.It's a legal setting. If you want to preach about what is and isn't moral, explain what's moral about a man who held such an important post in the investigation and failed to solve the case, or make any headway, could later turn on the bereft parents by broadcasting to the world that they had disposed of their child themselves as though she was a bag of rubbish.Yet, to this day, 12 years on, he hasn't produced an iota of proof.

      Delete
    5. Hi Anos18 February 2019 at 22:13
      And thanks for comment

      ”Yet, to this day, 12 years on, he hasn't produced an iota of proof”

      If there were just the slightest piece of evidence, or even the smallest indication of an abduction, I would gladly apologize for everything I’ve written on this blog.



      Delete
    6. Anonymous 18 February 2019 at 12:38

      “There are bank robbers who could be trusted with children.They're still bank robbers.”

      Agreed. But could a father, quoted as saying “…if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?”, be trusted with children?

      W-t-P

      Delete
    7. Björn18 February 2019 at 23:04

      ''If there were just the slightest piece of evidence, or even the smallest indication of an abduction, I would gladly apologize for everything I’ve written on this blog. ''

      When the parents returned to the apartment the child had gone. She wasn't seen walking anywhere. It was night time. The police were and are looking for an abductor.That's why the case is supposedly still alive after 12 years.

      You hate the McCanns so you're switched off to facts, evidence, common sense and balanced debate.An apology from you would mean as little as any other post you've spewed out on here.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous19 February 2019 at 09:24 - wtp

      ''Agreed. But could a father, quoted as saying “…if Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment, why would that be our fault?”, be trusted with children?''

      I think that was said in one of those yawn-inducing predictable TV interviews. It was introducing the possibility of Madeleine having an accident while her and her siblings were alone in the apartment.Or, in keeping with this blog- while she was abandoned.

      I'm taking the answer as GM saying if a child slips or falls then he or his wife didn't cause it or cause any injury. The answer was as clumsy as the question really.But those with a need to see the parents suffer and pay for a crime that has none of their fingerprints on it, prefer to say yes, it was their fault as they weren't there.So if they had been, they could have dealt with the accident.I'm not sure what the accident was, the vigilantes seem to have decided she had fallen all of two and a half foot from a sofa top due to all the 'blood spatter' they've invented. Silly idea. Besides, they were being checked on every half hour. The parents are guilty of neglect.Literally if not legally.But that hasn't been determined as a cause of death has it. It's neglect, Not murder or manslaughter. If the child had died due to an accident they wouldn't have gone to jail.So they wouldn't have hidden the body.Can GM be trusted with his other two children ? Who knows- we'll have to see what the people online who don't know think.

      Delete
    9. Hi Ano 19 February 2019 at 10:37, and thanks for comment

      "The police were and are looking for an abductor.That's why the case is supposedly still alive after 12 years"

      Yes, I'm sometimes inclined to believe that you're right about that, which may well be the reason as to why the two former suspects haven't yet been brought to justice in Portugal.

      Delete
    10. Björn18 February 2019 at 20:39

      Hi, Björn

      “Yes in a legal sense, you're of course right, but from a moral perspective, one could of course have expected more from a mother, who had lost a child just weeks earlier and claimed to be innocent.”

      No moral perspective came into it: Kate was suspected of some criminality, she had the right to remain silent and she did the right thing by exercising that right.

      A Law Professor Explains Why You Should Never Talk to Police
      https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/mvkgnp/law-professor-police-interrogation-law-constitution-survival

      W-t-Pooh

      Delete
    11. Björn18 February 2019 at 23:04

      ''If there were just the slightest piece of evidence, or even the smallest indication of an abduction, I would gladly apologize for everything I’ve written on this blog. ''

      The child had disappeared when they got back.Why would an abductor leave clues ?If the abduction story is an invention and there's evidence to back that up, the police would have made an arrest.You can't say to any suspect 'prove that you didn't do it'. That's not how it works.It's for the police to prove that they did.But they haven't. If it was possible it would have happened years ago.Which leads me to think the abduction is true.Why the police won't arrest the abductor we'll never know. But they've invested millions into keeping this a 'mystery' which explains it being open ended.

      Delete
    12. Hello W-t-Pooh, 19 Febr.2018 at 16:00
      and thanks for feed back.

      Yes, I’ve now read the article you referred to and I’m well aware of the advantages by staying silent, especially in cases where the suspect has committed some kind of crime, not necessarily the crime of which he/she is suspected. As a matter of fact, the McCanns really got themselves the best lawyer they possibly could (Isabel Duarte). Defending the McCanns is of course just a part of a judicial process, which unfortunately doesn’t take Madeleine's suffering into account.Finally, statistics tell us, that it’s worthwhile lying, while confessing always leads to some kind of punishment, but that’s life.

      P.S
      Your choice of pseudonym is what my playmates used to call me, when I was a child. In Swedish “Nalle Puh”, which alludes to my real first name Björn, which actually means bear. Just a piece of very interesting information about my private life. Have a nice day.

      Delete
    13. Bjorn the pooh...

      The McCanns were merely questioned in a police station.You don't have to defend yourself against questions or be defended. Accusations are another matter. But she didn't choose 'no comment' as a reply to accusations-only questions. Had the PJ gambled and charged the McCanns-or one of them- then they would have needed defending. Any other accusations have come indirectly from people on the internet who stack shelves by day but sleuth by night.

      Delete
    14. Björn/W-t-Pooh,

      I don’t understand why Kate McCann didn’t choose to answer only some of the police questions and not all. Why didn’t she answer with ‘No, I didn't.’ when asked ‘Is it true that in England you even considered handing over Madeleine’s custody to a relative?’, if only to put an end to speculation?

      NL

      Delete
    15. ( possibly because it was clearly a leading question that had absolutely nothing to do with Madeleine going missing and was trying to take Kate down an avenue where she had to defend herself as a mother able to cope with motherhood. Whoever framed that question was not exactly subtle was he.Pretty amateur.)

      Delete
    16. 13:37
      ("Whoever framed that question was not exactly subtle was he.Pretty amateur.")

      If you say so.

      ----------

      FYI:

      "Findings of fact

      13. On 3 May 2007 the child Madeleine McCann went missing; at the time of the information request the investigation into her disappearance was high profile and continuing. In determining to withhold certain information under the section 27 exemption, FCO consulted with the British Embassy in Lisbon and with two relevant authorities in the UK – Leicestershire Police and the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO).

      14. FCO told the Commissioner that a family member had made clear to FCO staff that all comments made by that individual to FCO had been made in strict confidence and were not intended for disclosure to third parties. FCO did not approach the family member again during the Commissioner’s investigation but told the Commissioner that they were confident the individual would not appreciate being contacted regarding disclosure of the relevant personal information, a position the Commissioner accepted."

      https://ico.org.uk/media/action-weve-taken/decision-notices/2009/463960/FS_50188322.pdf

      Delete
    17. Hi NL 20 February 2019 at 09:17
      nice to hear from you

      As far as I see things NL. Kate was so afraid that she'd contradict what Gerry said. So the most simple and easy question must have been terribly difficult to answer. However suppose she was innocent and felt humiliated and was scared, her daughters situation and fate should've been more important to her than anything and she wouldn't have cared at all about being framed, she would have fought like a tiger if she felt that she was being framed. However, as has been said here on the blog, from a legal point of view she did the right thing, especially if we assume, as I suppose her lawyer did, that she's guilty.

      Delete
    18. Anonymous20 February 2019 at 14:36
      13:37

      ("Whoever framed that question was not exactly subtle was he.Pretty amateur.")

      ''If you say so. ''

      Yes, I say so...

      Lots of official statements and fancy acronyms. What do either have to do with the question you quoted regarding whether or not Kate had tried to give Madeleine to a relative ? What does that question have to do with the child vanishing in a foreign country. Amaral had made his mind up that he had another 'joanna' case on his hands and was already trying to make things fit. It prevented him being subtle, apparently.What if she had said yes ? Does that point to killing or murder or burial ?

      Björn20 February 2019 at 14:47

      ''As far as I see things NL. Kate was so afraid that she'd contradict what Gerry said. So the most simple and easy question must have been terribly difficult to answer.''

      As far as you see, bjorn ? Is that almost to the end of your nose ? Imagine being in a country you hardly know yourself and realising your child had been stolen. Would you feel no fear or extreme fear ? This is what happens when you try to get into the minds of strangers in situations that don't involve you and doing it calmly with hindsight on the internet. You end up wasting words and time .But, if it floats your boat...

      ''from a legal point of view she did the right thing, especially if we assume, as I suppose her lawyer did, that she's guilty.''

      You are supposing what a stranger you don't know was supposing.No evidence-again.Guessing again. And, as usual, the intent is to blacken and indirectly accuse the parent of a missing child. Are you proud of that ? Plain weird.

      Delete
    19. Anonymous 20 February 2019 at 09:17

      I’ve been missing your calm, and I’m glad to hear from you again, NL.

      Kate was a suspect. Answering selectively could, potentially, be used against her by her investigators and/or in court. For instance, hypothetically, it could be argued that the division between answered and unanswered questions was significant in some way. Witnesses would be questioned, new discrepancies found, and new questions would arise. And so on.

      In the circumstances, there was no benefit for Kate in answering ANY questions. She couldn’t keep schtum to the end and answered the last. Understandably, her answer wasn’t as good as her silence would’ve been, IMO.

      “Q: Are you aware that in not answering the questions you are jeopardising the investigation, which seeks to discover what happened to your daughter?

      A: Yes, if that’s what the investigation thinks.”

      Have you watched the video at the link I posted for Björn?

      A Law Professor Explains Why You Should Never Talk to Police
      https://www.vice.com/en_uk/article/mvkgnp/law-professor-police-interrogation-law-constitution-survival

      Kind regards.

      Winnie-the-Pooh

      Delete
    20. Hi Anon20 February 2019 at 16:29
      and thanks for comment

      "Imagine being in a country you hardly know yourself and realising your child had been stolen. Would you feel no fear or extreme fear"

      Oh Yes,but unlike Gerry, I would extremely much fear that my child had been harmed,and I wouldn't accuse any innocent person, if there was no evidence whatsoever to support it, as Kate did, even if I knew that I was innocent but under suspicion.

      Portugal isn't North Korea, so I would've had faith in the PJ police officers. No doubt.

      Delete
    21. Greetings Rosalinda, Winnie-the-Pooh and Björn.

      Interesting link W-t-P, thank you. In my own country I would answer every police question, but James Duane is an American law professor at a research university in Virginia and without doubt he knows what he is talking about in relation to America. Quote from article: “The Supreme Court has said it's much better for guilty people to go free from time to time if that's the price we're going to pay for innocent people not being convicted, because one innocent man unjustly convicted is much worse than one guilty man going free.” I couldn’t agree more.

      I wonder if Kate McCann would have answered the questions if she were aware at the time that those questions would be released to the public (PJ files) later on. It might have saved a lot of trouble.

      NL

      “Supposing a tree fell down, Pooh, when we were underneath it?'
      'Supposing it didn't,' said Pooh after careful thought.
      Piglet was comforted by this.”
      ― A.A. Milne

      Delete
  13. ''the very accusations of; writing a fictional book and lying can be laid against Dr. Kate 'jemmy the windows' Healey Mcann.''

    But Amaral had a chance and held a position that allowed him to make arrests. After all, he claims to know the jemmying story was a fiction, therefore the abduction was. He also knew there was blood and DNA close to the scent of a body. He also knew- at an early stage- that Robert Murat was lying and had him tailed day and night. His reaction to his superiors decision to get him off the case was to take it out on the parents of the child whose fate we still don't know. He is best known for this and a string of accusations he made and the book that followed.The book was in bad taste and was damaging to what little integrity he had left following his conviction for perjory.

    ''He of course can walk his streets with pride. Kate is surrounded by silence, sneers and contempt.''

    You know this, Mr not-a-shill ? How ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. “Anonymous18 February 2019 at 01:01

      ''the very accusations of; writing a fictional book and lying can be laid against Dr. Kate 'jemmy the windows' Healey Mcann.''”

      You have avoided commenting on the statement you chose to quote,.

      Winnie-the-Pooh

      Delete
    2. '....his reaction was take it out on the parents...'

      What a very basic, and if you don't mind my saying, dumbass reason for GA's motivation 01:01. What school of psychology would lead to those conclusions. I hope you didn't invest too much in it.

      As a police detective he was following the evidence, as were the rest of the team who reached the same conclusion as GA. To claim the evidence was a result of GA's hatred of Gerry and Kate McCann is ludicrous.

      He was of course rightly miffed about being taken off the Madeleine investigation, just as he was closing in. But he didn't take it out on anyone, he wrote a book clarifying his side of the story. And as the world saw, it was completely different to Kate and Gerry's.

      And before anyone dives in to say, then why didn't his colleagues carry on his line of investigation. They did, the McCanns remained Arguidos for almost a year after.

      Delete
    3. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton18 February 2019 at 17:40

      '....his reaction was take it out on the parents...'

      ''What a very basic, and if you don't mind my saying, dumbass reason for GA's motivation 01:01. What school of psychology would lead to those conclusions. I hope you didn't invest too much in it.''

      I agree with him. It has nothing whatsoever with psychology. It has more to do with a simple reading of the chronology of events. Amaral was only a couple of years from retirement and a handsome pension.He messed that up by getting caught commiting perjury.Then he started telling anyone who wold listen that MI5 had scuppered his investigation into the McCann case .Then he was removed from that case too.His credibility failing as much as his integrity had he had to make a nest egg from something.The McCanns provided a far less dangerous target than MI5, Scotland Yard or any of the politicians. Unfortunately he had noting on them ( hence them never being charged).Mr Amaral, remember, revenge is a dish best served sober.

      Delete
    4. "He was of course rightly miffed about being taken off the Madeleine investigation, just as he was closing in. But he didn't take it out on anyone, he wrote a book clarifying his side of the story. And as the world saw, it was completely different to Kate and Gerry's."

      Rightly miffed about being taken off the Madeleine investigation?"

      Oh come on Ros, where in the world would a senior policeman being investigated for perjury in a case that had major similarities to the case that he was being investigated for be allowed to lead this high profile investigation?

      The general public would have no confidence in GA. His integrity was broken when he was convicted of perjury. Remember, he wasn't trying to protect his team in a case of, say, persecution or bad employment practice, but protecting them from accusations of acts of physical aggression against a woman, when, indeed, the court has since ruled that those acts had taken place.

      Delete
    5. Amaral sems to live in some surreal 'Groundhog Day'. Maybe he drinks a tad too much in his leisure time.He took the confessions of the cratures who killed that liitle girl, Joana Cipriano , and buried her. He accepted the story of them hiding her in a freezer, then putting her in bags then dispposing of her and both of them completely forgetting where they buried her.And he bought that without question. Him and his colleague later falsified evidence in the case and received suspended sentences. They were caught red handed lying.What did Amaral say about the verdict ? He was not surprised but blamed "political pressure".

      Then, in the McCann case, we have him turning up at the scene with his mind already made up.He wanted the parents.It's as though he wanted to even up the score after the Cipriano case.He blames them for hiding the body in a freezer then burying it.He had no evidence whatsoever.He was suffering deaj vu. His superiors must have considered him a liability in the greater scheme of things and removed him.What did he blame ? ''political pressure'' ( and MI5). What a hero.


      https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/5370361/Madeleine-McCann-police-chief-found-guilty-of-falsifying-evidence.html

      Delete
    6. How much do you hate Goncalo Amaral 22:05, let me count the ways. Actually, forgive the whimsey there, I can't be arsed, except to say too numerous to count and too tedious to recollect. Suffice to say you have exhausted them all, and they don't sound better on second and third tellings.

      Your claims of knowledge of the intimate workings of GA's mind, are as barmy as Bennetts. How do you know what he made his mind up to do? Again, imagination and guesswork on your part.

      Goncalo Amaral was removed from the investigation at the request of the British on behalf of the McCanns. Someone is responsible for that decision and their name will eventually become public. Trying to blur the issue by spamming my blog with 'Hate Amaral' posts won't change the McCanns dismal poll ratings one iota.

      Delete
    7. Ahh, you went and spoilt the whole post by missing the 'h' out of nothing. It reads 'nuttin' and brings to mind that mad Irish cage fighter.

      Try as hard as you might, you are not going to change the narrative. Your desperation to find other reasons for his removal from the investigation, reveal this is another Achilles heel. Whoever had GA removed will one day be named, that is a given, and I doubt it had anything to do with the Joana Cipriano case. GA was closing in on the parents just before he was taken off the case. Just before the Smith family were due to fly out to Lisbon to give their statements too. Coincidence? I don't think so, because the chances were the Smith family were going to describe Gerry McCann. GA had to go.

      Delete
    8. ''Your claims of knowledge of the intimate workings of GA's mind, are as barmy as Bennetts. How do you know what he made his mind up to do?''

      I actually said what it seems to be, not that i knew. I don't profess to have psychic power or that I'm all -knowing if i need to make a point.You should try it.My conclusions are drawn from what GA actually did and in what order.That's a better method than hating someone and making things up about them like a demented child.

      ''Goncalo Amaral was removed from the investigation at the request of the British on behalf of the McCanns. ''

      Source ? I can cite my source for the date and the verdict of the court case in which he was found guilty of being a liar.

      '' Trying to blur the issue by spamming my blog with 'Hate Amaral' posts won't change the McCanns dismal poll ratings one iota.''

      Polls ? Have you dropped your magic 'stats' book at last ? You can call it spam. But you can't call what i say untrue. I'm quoting the facts of what Amaral did in two cases, that he was removed once found guilty of perjury, and that he can't back his allegations up with a speck of anything, and hasn't been able to in 12 years. You can't argue against it-as usual - so you keep repeating the same nonsense and- as usual- avoiding questions. He hates the McCanns. He wants revenge. He lost his job because he broke the law.he didn't have to break the law and he didn't know anything about the McCanns when he did. But you try to defelct all those facts to the McCanns, no matter how mad it makes you appear. Just live with it.You can't change facts into fiction if they're genuine facts.If you try all you do is produce lies.

      Delete
    9. My source for GA's removal from the case? Why GA himself, straight from the horse's mouth. And yes I believe him.

      All of your voluminous tomes are based on your belief that Goncalo Amaral (and his team?) hates the McCanns and wants revenge. Ok. You are from the side that has pursued a 12 year vendetta, so I can see where your thinking comes from.

      Police work isn't based on hatred of a suspect. The idea is absurd, police officers have a job to do, they have no personal attachment to those they investigate, they neither love or hate them. If you use the 'GA hates us' defence in any Court case, you will be thought retarded. Oh yeah you did, and you were.

      It is the McCanns who are obsessed with Goncalo Amaral, not the other way around. Shouldn't they be celebrating the fact that GA is no longer on the case? That the search for their daughter is now in non hater hands? Are they not confident the truth will come out and GA's investigation will be proved a sham?

      But it's all moot anyway. We are 12 years on and GA's involvement in this case is history. What matters now is the current investigation, both here and in Portugal and there is no abductor.

      Delete
    10. If you ever show signs that you possess a modicum of intellect I'll point out the difference between a vendetta and justice.

      Amaral's book isn't 'police work'.

      Many people are disgusted when they see justice take a beating. But they haven't brought out any coloured ribbons for slander and defamation.It's not 'big enough'. Don't mistake it for hatred of Amaral. He isn't worth the energy. The anger is that he's been allowed to BS his way through 12 years and nothing's been done to him and nothing has come of his 'investigation' because he spoke nonsense.

      You don't think there was an abductor. You say it as though it's an indisputable fact. You cite the words of a convicted liar as your source. The police( remember them?) say she was abducted. Are they liars too ?

      Delete
    11. Hello Ano 19 February 2019 at 12:52

      "The police( remember them?) say she was abducted. Are they liars too ?"

      Yes Mark Rowley has in an interview about a year ago implied that she could've been abducted, because, as he said, "she was too young to run off and start a life of her own", but neither the Met/SY nor the Portuguese PJ have explicitly affirmed that Madeleine was abducted. Instead they've often talked about the case as a "missing- child case. Due to the enigmatic language by the heads of the Operation Grange, nobody really knows what the British police believe or do. So we've to go on guessing, I'm afraid.

      Delete
  14. ECHR, McCann and Healy v Portugal.

    Has a friendly settlement (not publicly available) been reached between the parties?

    "When the parties concerned agree to settle their dispute in this way, the outcome is usually that the State pays the applicant a sum of money."

    Just a thought.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. If you are suggesting the McCanns had received some sort of settlement, to drop the ECHR firstly I don't think that is possible. Secondly if it were and it happened, THEY WOULD BE SINGING FROM THE ROOF TOPS, ... pardon, via the bestie-friend The Sun, of the record of course.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous 18 February, 16:21

      Confidential settlement negotiations are not public.

      The McCanns can’t afford to lose their case and the Portuguese State might think it’s time to get rid of it.

      Just a thought.

      Delete
  15. "Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find. They cast therefore, and now they were not able to draw it for the multitude of fishes”


    Tis working a treat Ros,a real treat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quoting the Bible to Ros may not be the best thing to do.

      In any event it is Ros that was caught in the net.

      Delete
    2. Why thank you 09:01, it is isn't it ;)

      Tut tut 17:50, do you think bible quotes might melt me? lol. Nothing wrong with bible quotes at all, I often use them myself, but clearly they have gone over your head.

      Delete
  16. Notice how in the Portuguese court documentation Kate's name is Healy, not McCann. If their one and only wedding photo released to the press is anything to go by I have to say I don't believe they are married at all, I believe it was all PR suitable to the sensibilities of a catholic country.

    Even Jane Tanner wore a yellow gold wedding ring on her third finger left hand, talk about setting the stage, and yet people still think there was no pre-planning.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow Inspector Corner of the Yard. Have you examined all the wedding photographs of the Tapas gang yet ? I heard they were photoshopped because they all knew that years later in 2007 they'd find themselves together abroad burying one of their children.

      Delete
    2. There's no proof any of them buried a child abroad, and there's no proof when the photographs were produced either, they could have been made at any time.

      Delete
    3. Yes, of course they could. And if i had wheels I'd be a f**ng wagon.

      Delete
    4. When you have no answers and can't see the wood for the trees, resort to sarcasm.

      Delete
    5. Or go and do some research.

      Delete
  17. Rosalinda, you grotty little woman.You and the Poulson girl shold be locked up. Vile harridans.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Interesting how a harridan would publish your unnecessary and irrelevant comment.

      Delete
    2. @15:03

      Good comment.

      W-t-P

      Delete
    3. harridan
      noun [ C ]
      an unpleasant woman, especially an older one, who is often angry and often tells other people what to do

      Delete
    4. @17:59

      It is. Please stop arguing. Listen to what I say. :)

      W-t-P

      Delete
    5. I'll consider it if you can show me a 17 : 59 :)

      Delete
    6. @ 00:37

      I can’t. :( I‘ve lost again. :(

      I’m single, good looking, and I love honey, honey. Fancy a date?

      W-t-P

      Delete
    7. You're only after my honey,honey :/

      Delete
    8. @13:32

      No? Can’t blame you, pretty thing: I’m just a bear (with little to no brain), after all. :( A bit of honey here and there wouldn’t hurt, honey. Should you change your mind, get in touch with Christopher Robin to see if I’m available. :)

      W-t-P

      Delete
    9. Will do Winnie old chap.. I'll see if he can meet me on the corner, (when the lights are coming on and I'll be there, I promise I'll be there..)

      Delete
    10. @18:13

      No problem. I know you word is your bond. :)

      W-t-P

      Delete
  18. According to OG and ACPO the UK police were working closely with the PJ co-ordinated by Amaral from the morning of Friday 4th May and the physical presence of 3 UK Police officers were on the ground on Saturday 5th May around lunchtime to assist the PJ.

    If you believe this utter bollocks of OG, how can Amaral be solely to blame for the failed investigation?

    The Truth of the Lie released in the UK, would make many people think the Leicestershire police and CEOP were bent from the off and some may ask why? So lets beat GA around the head as a dodgy detective, it diverts attention from the lies of the UK police.

    GA states in his book he knew nothing of the UK police officers in PDL until Monday 7th May.

    The UK police states he did and Amaral and the PJ invited them.

    Somebody's lying in the McCann case and the evidence clearly points out its UK police officers not G. Amaral.

    Does it not seem odd that these Leics officers keep their presence secret from the Leics officers working on the case in the UK?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Leicester police were obviously there to protect the McCanns from prosecution, they were also responsible for bringing the dogs in, they were the ones that introduced death in 5a. Why would Leicester assist the Portuguese when they'd been actively working against them?

      Death in 5a is something we've been led to believe by a force that clearly can't be trusted, that's why I'm sceptical that the death happened there and then on the 3rd of May 2007.

      In addition, they never looked like they'd JUST lost a child, Gerry in particular was positively buzzing during the early days, plus John McCann said they'd 'already had a year to grieve', which takes us back to 2006, not 2007.

      Delete
    2. ''If you believe this utter bollocks of OG, how can Amaral be solely to blame for the failed investigation?''

      I've never believed the utter bolloks of OG. It was a PR stunt. They had to come up with something big as they'd made it a global media circus and online obsession. The lack of anything worthwhile coming from OG supports this. Amaral can't be solely blamed for the failed investigation. It was a team game and , later a two-teamed game. He just didn't help with his 'hunches'.
      As for the UK police. I've never met one I cold trust. Thy're rotten to the core with only the exception to the rule.That's nationwide.

      I believe the UK police are lying.And i believe it's on the orders from the UK high rankers. Amaral was just flailing in the wind which didn't help.If he'd put the same amount of industry into questioning the integrity of those in the UK apart from hinting about MI5 then he'd have more credibility for me.But he only knows one song.

      The Leics lot have some 'previous' too. They kept Greville Janner 'clean' for decades with their protecion of him and dismissal of all complaints made against him.They could have jailed him 30 years ago any time.But they didn't admit their 'amnesia' until the man was 87 and on his way out.

      And on that note, good luck, Nick. Bring the bastards down.

      https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/02/18/nick-man-sparked-westminster-child-abuse-probe-pleads-not-guilty/

      Delete
    3. Anonymous19 February 2019 at 16:16

      ''In addition, they never looked like they'd JUST lost a child, Gerry in particular was positively buzzing during the early days, plus John McCann said they'd 'already had a year to grieve', which takes us back to 2006, not 2007.''


      So, according to your forensic internet analysis, Madeleine was gone in 2006. Yet, despite the global media coverage, not a single neighbour, nursery teacher or anyone else recognised the family and Madeleine and reported that she hadn't been around for a year. Well done.

      What do people who have JUST lost a child 'look' like ? I haven't seen a link on here for ages that leads to a cabaret face reading performance.. Don't forget, they thought Madeleine was snatched-not dead.The' dead' narrative only exists in the social media files, not the police files.And, of course, Amaral's book about confusing truth and lies. I think it's called 'my life as a perjure' or something :)

      Delete
  19. It has been pointed out many times that Gonçalo Amaral did not lead the investigations in the Maddie case or the Joana case, but some still insist that he was the big boss. He did not have the power to make arrests as someone stated in a post nor was he responsible for making the McCanns arguidos. He did not have the authority that some like to think that he had. In Portugal, as in France and Italy, criminal investigations are carried out under the authority of the judge or judges of the Ministério Público. There are no maverick policemen who make decisions on their own or look for evidence without the knowledge of the judge(s). If he did, whatever he did or found would be be invalid. There is a hierarchy that has to be respected.

    Gonçalo Amaral was not an investigator, he was a coordinator. Coordinators usually do not go out in the field. They have the paper work, they decide which detectives go where, which cars they take, how much money they will need, they receive the reports from the investigators, pass them to the higher instances, they make requests to judges for permission to carry out certain diligences, etc.

    How can Gonçalo Amaral be blamed for not solving the crime when it wasn't his responsiblity? He was taken off the case simply because he was a very visible element of the PJ and the UK wanted to send a signal that they control everything, not because he was running the show. When he was taken off the case, he was sent to Faro with a promotion, he was not sacked. He decided however to retire so that he would have the freedom of speech to write his book about the case and what really happened. He did not present his theories, he presented in his book the conclusions that the investigation had come to in September 2007.
    Caroline

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous19 February 2019 at 18:51

      '' It has been pointed out many times that Gonçalo Amaral did not lead the investigations in the Maddie case or the Joana case, but some still insist that he was the big boss ''

      He was the co-ordinator of the PJ end of the investigation.That's 'big boss' enough. He has never stopped blowing off about the case as though he was the leading co-ordinator.

      '' He did not have the power to make arrests ''

      He did if he thought someone was guilty of committing a crime.Even a civilian can make an arrest.Anyone in the PJ had the authority.

      '', criminal investigations are carried out under the authority of the judge or judges of the Ministério Público''

      Yes, the authority.They don't go out and do the police work do they-they instruct the police to. Or was PDL awash with judges combing the area too ?

      ''If he did, whatever he did or found would be be invalid. There is a hierarchy that has to be respected.''

      So if he found evidence of a crime-especially of a corpse- he had no authority to do anything. Why was he (and the officers) actually sent to the crime scene then ?No wonder we needed proper policemen there...

      ''Gonçalo Amaral was not an investigator, he was a coordinator. Coordinators usually do not go out in the field. They have the paper work''

      Maybe they made an exception for Amaral given his record with 'paperwork'..

      ''How can Gonçalo Amaral be blamed for not solving the crime when it wasn't his responsiblity?''

      Then he should shut his mouth really shouldn't he ? If he didn't have the authority to investigate or do anything about evidence he doesn't have the authority to mouth off about it. Why hasn't he attacked his superiors for preventing the crime being solved ?

      ''When he was taken off the case, he was sent to Faro with a promotion, he was not sacked''

      Nobody said he was sacked.I said 'removed'. He was invited to jump or be pushed.Once he was removed he decided he was so expert in the case he could write a book.

      ''He did not present his theories, he presented in his book the conclusions that the investigation had come to in September 2007. ''

      Do you have this official 'conclusion' from 2007 ? Where is it ? A conclusion comes at the end of the case before it's put in the 'solved' basket or the 'cold' one. The investigation is still going on (so we're told).

      Delete
    2. Anonymous19 February 2019 at 18:51

      '' It has been pointed out many times that Gonçalo Amaral did not lead the investigations in the Maddie case or the Joana case, but some still insist that he was the big boss ''

      Then what gave him the authority to access and edit the documents in the Joana case ?

      Delete
    3. To 22:28
      You don't understand anything do you? Or are you making up these stories deliberately to blacken his name? Gonçalo Amaral was never accused of editing documents in the Joana case! He was convicted in giving false information to the police who questioned him about the incident with Leonor Cipriano in the PJ headquarters in Faro. All he did was report what his colleagues told him since he did not witness it. His one conviction was a political expedient to please certain people.
      Carolina

      Delete
    4. Anonymous19 February 2019 at 23:37

      To 22:28

      ''You don't understand anything do you? ''

      I understand that you're bending over backwards to minimise Amaral's role in the case as well as his crime. Read this slowly....

      He was a detective on the McCann case. I don't care what you say about him or his team having no powers to do anything. It doesn't matter.He was a detective and detectives have powers of arrest. I also understand what perjury means.

      ''All he did was report what his colleagues told him since he did not witness it. His one conviction was a political expedient to please certain people.''

      Key word : 'conviction'. His defence of only passing on what he had been told fooled nobody, obviously.As for political reasons being behind the sentence and 'certain people'- he says that for everything. He blamed the same reasons for his removal from the case and for the investigation being hijacked by the UK. He received an 18 month suspended jail sentence. If his involvement was so minimal and his deed so insignificant, why didn't appeal it ? Understand what I'm saying yet ?

      Delete
  20. GA would have NO authority to invite any kind of foreign police force into the investigation. It has to come from govt level - GA would know that. Lost in translation maybe ? Or did the UK turn up mob handed BEFORE any UK govt approval was given ?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Hey,
    Anonymous19 February 2019 at 12:52

    A message for you. She wasn't abducted/kidnapped. She's dead. That's the view of an ex -OG copper on the case. SY dn NOT believe she is alive now nor was alive at the time of the incident. Let that sink in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. ''That's the view of an ex -OG copper on the case.''A couple of questions for you to dodge :

      Why is he an 'ex' OG copper ?

      What is he now ?

      Why doesn't the public have this information as it was the public who paid for it ?

      Why hasn't the 'ex' copper have a name ?

      Delete
  22. Anonymous 19 Feb 2019 @ 19.51
    Do you have your own blog?

    ReplyDelete
  23. Unfortunately not. I've considered it more than once.Not a blog about the McCann case. There's too many of those. Most run out of gas after a year or two but some keep on. But this is the best of a shoddy bunch and i post here to try and bring a bit of balance and make the subject less stale. My intentions were good. :)

    ReplyDelete
  24. SeeMum 19 Feb 19:09: No surprise there - a lot of anecdotal things seem to indicate this.

    But if OG think this why no progress/closure of the case? And no investigation of the Fund?

    Still doesn't make sense.

    All in my own opinion.
    BlackCat

    ReplyDelete
  25. Hello Rosalinda amd others

    here're just some thoughts about the McCanns' strange way of demonstrating their innocence.

    They were actually given a second chance to escape justice, had they just chosen to accept the ruling of the Portuguese Supreme Court, but just as in in 2010/11, as the case was about to fade away, they foolishly demanded that something had to be done by British authorities in the search for Madeleine, who most people then thought must be dead.

    In doing so, they made social media their worst enemy, as more and more people began to see, that whatever they did, it was just a game to the gallery.

    Their appeal with the ECHR, came about in a similar situation, when everything had started to calm down and people had begun to lose interest in the case. We should therefore always bear in mind that it’s the McCanns themselves, who make this case going, especially on social media, and I cannot understand why they do not see that they’ve been “on a suicide mission for themselves and for their own team of liars (trump travesty)”, for a long time now, but still haven’t learnt to shut up and accept that they’ll have to live with a cloud of suspicion hanging over their heads for the rest of their lives, and all their actions to destroy others will just make it worse for them

    ReplyDelete