It seems Scotland Yard have requested further funding for Operation Grange for another year, rather than for the usual 6 months.
I don’t know what I make of that, I kind of had it in my head OG would wrap up soon, around the time Trump gets led away in handcuffs and we go to war with Ireland. To be honest I had forgotten the last increment was about to run out,which is a sign I suppose that I and I’m sure others, have grown indifferent. It ends when it ends.
For those responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance, it must be the worst news possible. They would much prefer to hear that Scotland Yard, despite much effort, could not reach a conclusion, and the file will archived. It will only be when the file is closed or someone (not them) is arrested that they will be relieved of the constant fear of that knock on the door. Why twice as much this time they will ask themselves, ‘are they closing in?’. For the guilty there will be no peace for the foreseeable future.
Gerry and Kate it would seem are extremely grateful, according to their spokesman Clarence. I can only imagine that extremely grateful was through clenched teeth, as I can’t imagine it to be anything other than highly frustrating for the parents. Unfortunately as the parents made such a big hullaballoo about the Brits stepping in to solve their problem, they daren’t criticise them now.
The bigger problem, and the one that loyal lap dog Tracey Kandhola led with, was the upcoming Netflix production of Madeleine’s story (as yet untitled), which is due for release this month. The parents are not happy. They haven’t participated in it, nor has Clarence, and their lawyers will be watching it carefully for any libel.
Now I haven’t got a clue what is going to be in the Netflix production, but I suspect the McCanns and Clarence Mitchell have, hence their refusal to take part and their threat to have lawyers watching. They claim they are not participating because there is an ongoing police investigation. OK, that’s fair enough, but it never stopped them in the past, even when they were arguidos. At that time they made much use of Clarence’s services.
I happen to be a big fan of Netflix productions, I lost 3 days when I began watching House of Cards. They are especially good with their docu-dramas, so it will be interesting to see their take on the Madeleine story.
Hi Ros!
ReplyDeleteCouple of things. If OP GRANGE had asked for LESS time, say THREE months then I might think they were either closing in or closing down.
Also, the Mcs might not want to have anything to do with the Netflix thingy but we hear that the delightful Forrest Gamble and Scammers & Swaggers have input. Whether that is true or not I don't know.
I do know if it is in any way detrimental to the Mcs it will never get aired. Although it was shown later, recall how the Fred and Rose West with Trevor MacDonut prog was pulled just one hour before being aired (= furious lawyer activity)
SixYearsInaComaMan
Aah SYIACM, sadly your post telling me how wonderful I am didn't make it to this page and I can't find it :( It's a shame because I keep having to return to postbox version of it, but it is worth the trouble because it is the cyber equivalent of a sparkly glass of bubbly! Cheers my friend :) Do note the added whimsy in recent posts, tis to celebrate your return. The hamster Conan the Barbarian tale of woe was mostly for you lol. I thought you might appreciate the noble name of the said small rodent.
DeleteI think the Netflix production will be aired, though I do not like the sound of Forrest Gamble, Scammers and Swaggers having input. Though I tend to think the production will not be oriented towards the McCanns side of the abduction story, in the same way as the one produced by Emma wasername, who gave evidence in their libel claim.
For Scammers and Swaggers, this case has been the ruin of them. It has destroyed their reputations, because they were trying to push a simply unbelievable story. Now they are simply not credible narrators.
Regarding OG asking for more time, I wonder if they asked for more cash because there is 'action' ahead? Maybe another dig in Portugal or maybe arrests and a trial?
I really don't think those response for Madeleine's disappearance are comforted by another 12 months of investigation. For the parents, even if they are innocent and have been confirmed innocent, living under an investigation can't be anything other than a nightmare. Look how happy they were when the original investigation was shelved and how miserable they look now.
“Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton 3 March 2019 at 14:55
DeleteAah SYIACM, sadly your post telling me how wonderful I am didn't make it to this page and I can't find it :( It's a shame because I keep having to return to postbox version of it, but it is worth the trouble because it is the cyber equivalent of a sparkly glass of bubbly! Cheers my friend :)”
And here it is, my Lady:
http://cristobell.blogspot.com/2019/02/how-hate-is-used-to-stop-d ebate.html?showComment=1551198909597#c2101635327380334482
“Anonymous26 February 2019 at 16:35
Hi Ros. :-)
I hope you are ok. You sound it!
Not written in for a while (you know what it's like with comas) but read everything. I should change my name to "11 years in a Coma Man" (6 for Mr Pixel-face and 5 more for Dr Totperson!)
I agree with JJ that OP G is just a government facade to shut Brooks up and keep the Mcs happy and have done nothing and will continue to do nothing until disbanded. I get so fed up with "One last line of inquiry..."
That's as maybe...
Meanwhile, I want to congratulate you on your blog, which, to me, has always been a fixture, a go-to place, and it appears, for so many others. I know you are very observant but just to speak out to say myself, and I guess stacks of others, have witnessed the almost complete desolation the McTwitter Hashtag. It's almost as barren as the MMM Knitting Circle (which, oo, maybe gets 3 posts a day!).
No one (naturally) trusts the Cesspit, the Facebook groups had their day years ago and NT has returned to the long grass for the most part.
McTwitter comprises pointless Textusa BRT/Swingers interchanges which is 99% of Mario (Textusa's) blog now (which is not a bog so much now as a dumping ground for Twitter cast-offs). Borrrring!
ZZZZZZZ! Enough to drive a person into anther 5 year coma!
But here is buzzing, as usual. More traffic than the Champs-Elysees at rush hour.
So..
I am very pleased to praise yourself, your work and the blog. Everyone gets a fair shout here.
Where else does that apply? Gimme a few years and I may come up with an answer because it escapes me for now.
Six Years In A Coma Man (plus another 5)”
Bless.
Winns
Bless you SYIACM, I can't read often enough how my haphazard, no rules, no censorship, no locking down discussions, has outlasted and outshone the lot of 'em!
DeleteI never got on with the petty rules and censorship of the forums and facebook pages. Can you imagine how I felt at having large chunks of my posts 'removed by admin', leaving them making no sense whatsoever! Grrr. I think most of the hosts and admins were on power trips, their ultimate punishment 'the ban' for anyone who stepped out of line or cracked a joke.
One of the old favourites: 'no discussion outside the police files', accompanied by orders will be obeyed or you will be put in the cooler. It was like being back in the playground all over again. Unluckily for them, I was the one in the playground who stood up to bullies (on behalf of all the downtrodden, I had Marxist tendencies even then), they would be the ones going home in tears.
I am very fortunate in the way my blog has evolved, but it is more luck than judgement. I remember when I first went on social media, I found it terrifying! As a single mum, stuck indoors, I was desperately lonely, I just wanted people to talk to! My first chat room was AOL books - yeh right! If I thought the book chat was ferocious, I was then traumatized by Celebrity Big Brother chat, which I reckon had a psychopath percentage of around 75%. Finally I stumbled into the McCann world, which turned out to be a full scale war.
I blame myself, obviously, there was clearly a pattern, the fighting obviously gave me a buzz. It's at this point that I see myself as a female warrior, a mix of Wonder Woman, a large dollop of Highlander (there can be only one, with a dash of Agatha Christie and Dorothy Parker. But, in a nutshell I get a buzz out of destroying fascists with words.
I came out of the AOL Europe Board wars with lots of battle scars, but also a lot experience in dealing with hostile posters and trolls. They haven't been able to scare me away, so they are being civil and explaining their case. OK not fully, but the dialogue is open, and I think we all appreciate a bit of civility.
Sadly, there may well be time for you to have another 5 year nap, but this case has had so many surprises who knows.
''I don’t know what I make of that, I kind of had it in my head OG would wrap up soon, around the time Trump gets led away in handcuffs and we go to war with Ireland.''
ReplyDeleteYou were close, as usual, Rostradamus.
''For those responsible for Madeleine’s disappearance, it must be the worst news possible.''
ReplyDeleteYes, those two lightning forces hot on their tails. Not . Call me crazy, but I think if the FACT that the police haven't gotten close to anyone guilty in 12 years, they're not exactly panicking now. They'll see the ritual repeated again ; They ask for money;they get money; they do nothing;life goes on; repeat.
While we're playing 'lets make some wild guesses and pretend we're mind readers', I suggest the parents are sick and tired of the OG farce and Netflix BS. They wanted their daughter home or her abductor/s caught. Not to remain public enemies through the incompetence of the politicians who wanted this blown to bits and beyond solution.
Does anyone care about the Netflix production ? I mean really care ? When was the last 'film' you watched online whee you were left surprised ? Since Richard Hall and his ilk have been doing it all that's happened are repeats.That's sad. Repeats of films that only make guesses. Nothing new can possibly be waiting in a Netflix production.It will be the same old crap with new actors looking distraught and probably really loud dramatic background drumming.
Stick to House Of Cards. The UK original. Ironically it would throw more light on this case than anything Netflix can be commissioned to lie about. The reptiles in the corridors of power ? I couldn't possibly comment...
I agree 22.01. I think the McCanns must be sick an tired of OG and indeed Netflix. OG have not lifted suspicion from them, as you say they remain public enemies, though I think that a tad harsh.
DeleteI am not where incompetence of politicians come in unless you are referring to the interference of New Labour in the original investigation. Quite how they wanted it blown to bits and beyond solution I don't get.
Well as Netflix have said in their original blurb, this case aroused interest worldwide, there will be a big audience. Netflix is a runaway success, their productions equal anything Hollywood can produce and they have a huge established audience.
This is in fact the Hollywood treatment Gerry and Kate wanted back in the early days, but someone pointed out it was in bad taste and they pulled the plug.
Actually, I think I learned more about politics from watching Armand Iannucci's 'The Thick of It', that seems to a lot closer to what actually goes on in the corridors of Whitehall. More so I think than House of Cards.
Youtube Tim Fortescue, Bella.
DeleteHe was the Chief Whip of the Tory party when-coincidentally- we entered Europe under Heath. Francis Urquhart was a fictional version( exactly how 'fictional' is debatable ). The original book was written by a former Tory chief of staff( coincidences abound). New Labour were cynically called 'new' as they were basically a Tory B team and Blair was more Tory than Cameron and Thatcher. he pulled a right coup off there .
The video on youtube is only about 2 minutes long and the quality is good for it's age. In that 2 minutes you'll realise how sinister these creatures are and how low they can sink.All for leverage.
If they still haven't solved it and need another year, I think it's time they started looking elsewhere. Forget Portugal, all the digging there proved unfruitful and the ground was rock-hard at the time of the fake abduction.
ReplyDeleteI don't believe they could have pulled off a burial in Portugal, Gerry would never have been so smug if a body had been left 'out there' just waiting to be found.
No, the body has to be somewhere secure and somewhere no-one would ever think of looking.
@ 2 March 23:37
Delete''If they still haven't solved it and need another year, I think it's time they started looking elsewhere. Forget Portugal,..I don't believe they could have pulled off a burial in Portugal, Gerry would never have been so smug if a body had been left 'out there' just waiting to be found. ''
What burial ? What body ? Are you imagining Madeleine dead ? Or are you confusing the case with another ? The nearest the police have come to pronouncing her dead is saying that they have to consider it as 'also' a possibility. Get that ?
Possibility. The crime took place in Praia Da Luz, Portugal.It didn't take place on youtube or twitter.
Is there any particular reason you prefer the theory you're espousing ? Is it more fun than the one the two police forces have espoused - ie, that she was abducted ( boring, I know. No 'scandal'). Yes, I know before you say it, the detective with a police record for lying about evidence in another missing girl case has said the child is dead in his book.But he was removed wasn't he. And nothing he has said has inspired the PJ to follow his lead/s .I wonder why.They're sat growing dust on the same shelf as the ( yawn) dogs findings.Oh yes..and the rivers of blood that flooded the apartment ( according to those slick internet sleuths).
I suppose i could have misunderstood you. I doubt that though. Maybe you think all of the above is actual evidence of a death and /or murder. And that there's the same amount of evidence to incriminate Gerry as the disposer of the corpse( not Kate ? why ?).It's all there as clear as day but the police have been told to say different by their bosses who have been told to cover it all up for the two doctors by their bosses. Why else could it be so 'mysterious'. Perhaps you could address these possibilities with the same vigour and imagination that made you 'see' a dead child and sinister father burying her.Could you do that ? You've told us all what happened ( minus the location of the body, obviously). Now tell us why no police force will admit the same . Why would they be party to a covering up ? Why would they allow a police matter to become a political powder keg ? If it was just infanticide committed by a parent or a child accidentally falling off a chair..
With their embarrassment of riches getting them no where maybe strange ought to dust down the shelves and have a look-see.
DeleteHello 3 March @ 03:14,
DeleteYou are obviously very passionate about this case and don't believe the child is dead, whereas I believe the child was dead before any of us heard the name Madeleine Beth McCann.
Agree though with your interpretation of the supposed evidence in 5A, including that of the dogs, there never was any evidence in that apartment, which leads me to believe the child died elsewhere and everything the public saw was part of the abduction hoax.
There's absolutely no evidence the child is still alive, and the child being long since dead is based on common sense, logic and a phone call made to Operation Grange, of which I was asked if I knew where the body was.
Therefore, at least one person at OG thinks the child we know as Madeleine is dead.
''You are obviously very passionate about this case and don't believe the child is dead, whereas I believe the child was dead before any of us heard the name Madeleine Beth McCann. ''
DeleteI'm not passionate about this case. It keeps the cogs oiled but that's it. The passion you've misunderstood is more about my war against lazy thinking and short attention spans.And of course, my real pet hate, the sheep looking for a herd...
'' I believe the child was dead before any of us heard the name Madeleine Beth McCann. ...the child died elsewhere and
everything the public saw was part of the abduction hoax.''
I know people who believe in God and some who believe in aliens and ghosts. I believe in none of them. I can't prove the negatives. They can't find the proof og the positives. It's just belief. I base my beliefs on what i can see or touch rather than faith and guesswork. I build my beliefs based on evidence that exists, not that i imagine or create.For instance, i don't have to rely on belief to point at the amount of politicians and the extent of their apparent panic and determination to fund this thing. And that leads me to believe it wasn't a police matter. A dead child would be a police investigation.Not a political ticking bomb.Where is the evidence of a death ? You say there wasn't any in 5a. So where was it ? You say the child being missing isn't proof of an abduction but proof of her death. Why ? How ?
''There's absolutely no evidence the child is still alive, and the child being long since dead is based on common sense''
There's absolutely no evidence that the child is dead either. If you tried to prosecute anyone and your case was 'it's common sense' the defence counsel would rip you a spare one.If it's all so clear and everything points to it, where's the evidence to back that up ? Why would any country leave this case open and pay for it if they have no idea where she is dead or alive? If they suppose she's dead they have a duty to say so and stop draining taxes. The likelihood is that she is dead, I concede that much. Not because of the crime novel club say the parents 'fit the stats'. But because it is such a high profile case and Madeleine's face is so well known world wide, she would have been seen well before now. The 'locked in a cellar' that some ex halfwit copper come up with was insulting.
'' a phone call made to Operation Grange, of which I was asked if I knew where the body was.''
Is that an error in grammar, or are you trying to tell us that you were part of the OG team ?I hope it was the former, because the latter is almost hilarious. Or are you saying you made an anonymous phone call and asked what OG are doing ? You suggested the child was dead and the reply was ''where's the body'' ? In which case, it was a perfectly reasonable question. If you were a copper and someone told you the child you were looking for is dead, would you say ok thanks, or ask where the body is ? You think him using the word 'body' is an admittance that there is one. That's painfully naive.
''No, the body has to be somewhere secure and somewhere no-one would ever think of looking.''
DeleteCriminal masterminds then. Wouldn't have thought of that.
Not criminal masterminds, just smarter than most of the police officers involved, excluding Leicester police, they were involved from the outset and left as soon as the McCanns left.
DeleteSo the police agreed it wound't be hidden in a place that would be hard to find, it would be hidden somewhere obvious. Fair enough.That makes a heap of sense.So, once they didn't find the child sitting on top of a car bonnet or tied cunningly to a lamp post they were baffled. What were the Leicester police 'involved' in from the outset other than the investigation ? Care to share ? Or carry on guessing...
Delete"that loyal lap dog Tracey Kandhola"
ReplyDeleteTracey Kandohla
They have requested the money, they might be refused so the police can close the case, then the government can continue with the other pantomime that is Brexit
ReplyDeleteScotland Yard press release in full.
ReplyDeleteO.G. has never interviewed the Mccanns as potential suspects-Rowley.
OG has achieved a complete understanding of it all and we are completely satisfied of the Mccanns innocence.-Rowley
OG confirm Tanner is a witness of the highest integrity its just unfortunate she witnessed an innocent holiday maker returning from the night crèche.
OG have located the man JT saw and they confirm it was him walking across the road with a child not wrapped up for the cold.
It is lucky he was such a poor father otherwise a blanket would have stopped a positive ID.
OG is perfectly happy with the explanation he gave us that the sun was shining and it was hot.
OG is perfectly happy that the Leics police encouraged any witness to contact the suspect's holt-line directly.
It has saved OG thousands of hours of investigation and has benefited the UK tax payers immensely.
OG has complete faith that the McCanns would have given them any leads they found.
OG are delighted that the Chief Constable of Leics police has confirmed the fund is completely legal and has been administered to such a high standard that it was given the Leics police's official seal of approval on their website for many years. This has saved the UK tax payer millions in investigation costs.
OG is completely satisfied that the criminal activity in PDL by Superintendent Hill whose superior officer at that time was Mark Rowley has been investigated.
Rowley has investigated himself most thoroughly and has found himself completely above reproach.
OG has been informed by the McCanns official spokesman that the CEOP and police manuals found in the McCanns possession are normal light holiday reading and can be bought at any airport bookshop and OG accept this explanation without question.
In conclusion, OG have not, nor will not, investigate the McCanns in any way and all of you can rely on us not to ever come to a conclusion.
Confirms-albeit on a larger scale- what I've thought about the UK police for years. If you need them you have to just hope they'll show up. When they actually do show up they demonstrate how expert they are in knowing fully what they 'don't have to do'. They're experts. It's the knowing what they should be doing that throws them. Far too many bent coppers today.
DeleteSo OG has the Leics 'seal of approval'. High praise indeed given their record of covering up, dishonesty and corruption. It's a bit like getting a character reference from the mafia.
I'd like OG to add a little detail of what they claim to have investigated. What was the nature of their investigation into certain officers' practices and what wee the findings ? Why wasn't the accidental tourist named ? What has convinced them of the absolute innocence of the parents and Murat and his 'small circle' ? After all, it's only fair we get to know what our tax money was taken off us for ? Isn't that our right ?
OG was a political chess piece. It still is. The game is political chess. The least valuable and least versatile pieces are the ones of the greater number; the pawns. Or, the police in this particular game.
It was check mate in 2007. It's taken 12 years to back up a few moves and arrive at a stale mate.But we're well and truly there. Anyone who doesn't see that is closing their eyes because they can't handle it.
You are making a lot of assumptions about OG by filling in the gaps you don't know, with whatever is going on in your head. Regarding your demands to know what taxpayer money has been spent on, I am sure all will be revealed in due course.
DeleteI don't agree with your chess analogy. I think it is more a game of cat and mouse and the cat has just swiped the mouse with his giant paw. This cat is outside the mousehole and it ain't going away, it's just been given a year's supply of catnip.
'Those who don't see it can't handle it'. I don't see 12 long years as a sign the authorities have given up so I must be among those 'who can't handle it'. I'm not in any way emotionally involved in the outcome of Operation Grange, so I can pretty much handle anything that is said in the news, makes not one iota of difference to my life.
How you see further funding of double the usual amount, as a sign OG have got nothing and the investigation is going nowhere is quite bizarre. If that were the case it would be closed, shelved at the very least. there would be no justification for giving them more funds. More funds mean they are not giving up.
But going back to your chess analogy, the white King, Queen, Knights and Bishops are no longer in the game. All but a few knights bowed out in September 2007, those remaining are hemmed in by pawns. The black King GA, has only had to make a few moves, it's been a long old game, but victory is in sight.
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton3 March 2019 at 13:55
Delete''You are making a lot of assumptions about OG by filling in the gaps you don't know, with whatever is going on in your head.''
No, that's exactly what you did with your blank canvas and imagination. My only assumption was, and still is, that OG is an illusion.A trick.
'' Regarding your demands to know what taxpayer money has been spent on, I am sure all will be revealed in due course.''
You have no reason to be sure.
'' I don't see 12 long years as a sign the authorities have given up so I must be among those 'who can't handle it'. ''
I didn't say they had given up. I said they aren't really looking.Those who have dedicated years of time and energy creating profiles they imagine fit the McCanns, then creating narratives that those imagined characters would fit, need to see them charged. I'm not confident they could handle an alternative truth after all that work and determination.
''How you see further funding of double the usual amount, as a sign OG have got nothing and the investigation is going nowhere is quite bizarre.''
Double, triple, quadruple.Makes no difference. I keep telling you it gives the public appearance of a deep investigation.It's a red herring. Only a result emerging will convince me otherwise.What you have just said is exactly why they announce it publicly.
''More funds mean they are not giving up. ''
Let's see what the money pays for.
Your 'Black King' was never a king. If he was he'd still be on the board. He was more a black Bishop. He could move long distance fast but only diagonally.He was knocked off easily.The two kings are still on the board.The pawns are all over the place.The knights are doing the work. On the black and white chequered floor you can't always see the pieces ( he said enigmatically).If you fancy losing a few quid, Bella, I'll play you at chess any time.If you don't fancy it, we can play strip chess. Don't get excited, I don't lose :)
Don't get excited, I don't play chess. I can play and used to many years ago, in the convent there were many eager players, this was before the internet and videos etc. As kids we played constantly and became very skilled. But I'm afraid it bores me. We are currently having a bit of a trivial pursuit revival with a 20+ year old board game but as we are all knocking on a bit, it doesn't seem to matter. I am happy to say I am the current champion. However, you might like to know on a pool table I would whoop your ass!
DeleteI know you keep telling me Operation Grange is only supposed to give the appearance of a deep investigation. You keep telling me a lot of things, it doesn't mean I believe them. You are asking me to believe something that is totally illogical and then feigning outrage when I don't. How do you know what Operation Grange are doing? Why is your guess more credible than mine?
I didn't say my guess was more credible than yours. Nor did I ask you to believe that my theories were right. You asked me questions and I merely answered them as fully as possible.We all guess and we all base the guesses on likelihoods and base the likelihoods on what seems to make sense. With no physical evidence available and no statements being of interest all we have left is what we know for sure and doesn't need evidence.For me, that is the unusual markers ; the joint investigation; the involvement of politicians and PMs ; the urgent response of MI5. None of those things happen in any other criminal event home or abroad.It isn't just because of how rare that is, it's because of how many of the political elite were prepared to involve themselves and how fast.Those things are real. No discussion about it is necessary . But it's highly significant for the reasons I have outlined. Plus, of course, it was these same elite that formed OG. Another one-off. They're good at one-offs, apparently. Like the one-off when a politician was asked early on to resign and take over how the case was 'controlled'.
DeletePool ? I could beat you with one arm tied around my leg and a blindfold on . I was playing snooker on a mini table at 5. In my 20s i was up to no good around the west country for years relieving the local sheep worriers and fishermen of their hard earned.'appy daze.. :)
You are very cynical JJ, for which I probably can't blame you, as OG must be the longest running police investigation ever. What is it? 7 years going into 8?
ReplyDeleteIt doesn't exactly inspire confidence that they are onto anything or will ever be onto anything. But that's because we don't know what they are doing and they don't want us or the suspects to know what they are doing,
From a logical perspective, they are not chasing traffickers, paedo gangs or abductors, at least there is no visible sign that they are or have been. So who are they investigating? More precisely, what are they investigating?
I don't accept the nonsense that OG are sticking to 'an abduction as if it were here in the UK'. No police investigation works in that way, they go where the evidence leads them.
I agree the police probably haven't interview the parents or their friends, but not because they have ruled them out and don't need their help. That would be absurd, they need all the help they can get from witnesses - when do police every say we won't trouble you again?
For the police, the more witnesses talk the better, they would not turn a witness away, saying its ok we don't need any more evidence. The idea that Gerry, Kate have been given a free pass is ludicrous, they are not talking because they are lawyered up.
If the police are covering up for the McCanns JJ, then why aren't the McCanns co-operating with them? I am afraid that is the big flaw in the whole 'OG is a cover up' argument.
In the drama documentaries I watch the families of the missing and the police are practically joined at the hip. It is the families who do not give the police any peace, they are constantly returning to the police with information they have found out and adding anything they can think of to help with the search.
That doesn't seem to be the relationship the McCanns have with Operation Grange. Going by the McCann supporters on here, the parents are pissed off with OG. The parents being pissed off is perfectly understandable, more understandable than the parents being extremely grateful.
What do the parents have to thank OG for? As a previous poster pointed out, they kept them as public enemies, they have done nothing to raise that cloud of suspicion from over them. They want their daughter back and the abductor found, none of which has happened, or looks likely to happen so what exactly are they extremely grateful for?
'' we don't know what they are doing ''
DeleteBut.....
'' they are not chasing traffickers, paedo gangs or abductors, at least there is no visible sign ''
'' I don't accept the nonsense that OG are sticking to 'an abduction as if it were here in the UK' ''
''the police probably haven't interview the parents or their friends, but not because they have ruled them out and don't need their help. That would be absurd,''
''The idea that Gerry, Kate have been given a free pass is ludicrous, they are not talking because they are lawyered up''
''In the drama documentaries I watch the families of the missing and the police are practically joined at the hip. ''
''That doesn't seem to be the relationship the McCanns have with Operation Grange''
All those inferences and conclusions from 'nothing' and 'not knowing' . That's a perfect example of inventing a whole screenplay from zilch. You have the narrative in your head and a blank canvas.
Your 'culprits' are the parents ( gotta love those unrelated documentaries). Others will point at other statistics that talk about child abductions, child trafficking and paedophiles. All very real possibilities. But you have the culprits as the parents. So you will, at every opportunity, talk about the high statistical possibility of a member of the victims family harming or killing their children. Along with this you play down or flatly deny child trafficking and paedohilia. You want those removed from the list of possibilities as you have the parents as the culprits.So you deny them in case anyone entertains the notion of them being more realistic possibilities.
You cite unrelated 'crime documentaries' on the one hand yet point to all the unusual markers of this case that make it 'unique.' If it's that unique why point to all the 'relevant' cases that are so alike to this one ?You're contradicting yourself . You can't have it both ways just so it fits your theory. Amaral tried that.
OG have had years to nail a McCann. Why would they suddenly discover the requisite evidence now ? Accept it. All the authorities are satisfied of their innocence.No reason for that to change.
I always have a narrative and a screenplay going on in my head, I'm a writer :)
DeleteIf I were writing this screenplay however, I would try to find reasons for why they behave as they do, has all of this been to protect their remaining children? In a way that would be understandable. In those early days their children and those of their friends were at risk of being taken away by the Portuguese authorities.
I tend to think of the whole abduction story and campaign as a runaway train. Little lies quickly became great big whoppers, Madeleine's disappearance became much more than a missing child story, it became a global multimillion pound cause.
Your final paragraph. Let me try a different approach. Do you think those who made Madeleine disappear, be it an abductor or some sort of sinister gang, are now off the hook because too much time has gone by? Do you not think there is a possibility that Operation Grange are closing in on the real abductors? Is there no possibility Operation Grange have someone, other than the McCanns in their sights?
Does your 12 years and nooooo evidence apply to the real perpetrators of this crime? Why are so sure the real perpetrators won't be caught?
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton3 March 2019 at 14:25
Delete''I always have a narrative and a screenplay going on in my head, I'm a writer :)''
And that's fine. But do I need to remind you as a former teacher of the major difference between creative and formal writing :)
Unless you're a personal friend or family member, you can't know how they behave.All you can comment on is how they appear to you in an artificial context- ie on camera in a Q n A session. That's nothing useful.
Can you give me an example of those lies with the proof of them being lies ? The small ones will do.
''Madeleine's disappearance became much more than a missing child story, it became a global multimillion pound cause. ''
That was something the McCanns went along with believing it could alet a global set of eyes to find their daughter. They are medical people not media. The government dreamed up the media circus and agreed to fund it. Question their motives. It was their idea.
If it was an abductor with sinister intentions of his own or as part of a gang of animals, no chance. They are guilty of something unthinkable and it will never be too late to put them away.If it was a procurer acting on behalf of a gang who have orders from 'important' people( and it's happened enough times before) then I think there's a chance that they were never really going to be on the hook in the first place. If it was another country's Intel, which would explain why our Military Intelligence took over, then i think it's dead in the water. It would indicate leverage. Outside bet- see what Brexit brings. The time of that being resolved might coincide with something developing in this case...
'' Is there no possibility Operation Grange have someone, other than the McCanns in their sights?''
Considering how long this has gone on and how expensive it has been- and , of course, how public- how long would they need to look at suspects if they are in their sights ? If they're taking that long they'd have to have reason to suspect them that strongly.If they have enough to suspect anyone that strongly they have enough to bring them in for questioning.
''Does your 12 years and nooooo evidence apply to the real perpetrators of this crime? Why are so sure the real perpetrators won't be caught?''
Because I believe the political overkill and involvement of MI5 suggests it was far more than a crime for the police to solve. The funding of the search says the same. I stand by that until I'm shown of any other crime receiving that kind of attention before this case or since.Think about this : Every 'man in the street' have a mountain of 'evidence' against the parents. All the 'experts' making films and writing books have the same. But nothing the police have done back in 2007 or since suggests they agree. It's as though they won't examine the claims of the public because they 'know' it's wrong.That's knowledge before investigating. From where ? They're too sure.I think those above the detectives and beat policemen on the ground know the narrative. Somewhere there had to be some kind of ransom. It might still be in place ( and need topping up).But as long as the massed ranks are looking in the wrong direction they aren't under public scrutiny.The McCanns supposed appearance of guilt is serving them. The only possible alternative is that if the parents are guilty they'd have to have some tremendously powerful information on some politicians in order to all in favours this big. That's far too unlikely.It's a mystery wrapped up in a whatsisname..
I know a fair bit about writing 15:30, I have HND in professional writing and I am a published author.
DeleteI see where you are coming from on the 'I don't know them' front, and I agree to a certain extent. They have been automatons on camera, even in the film made by their friend Jon Corner. However, we have seen glimpses of the real characters, Kate in that same Jon Corner video for example.
The thing is 15:30, I don't like to be manipulated, it's a pet hate, and when I saw Kate with 'CuddleCat' peeking out of her rucksack, I felt manipulated and have felt that way with every interview they have given since. I know they are trying to get a message across and they use their airtime for this, but it is not endearing. They never relax and go off script, they never become emotional when speaking about their daughter. They seem like cold people, but then again, as you say, I don't know them.
I'm not buying the global campaign is something the McCanns 'went along with'. The show was well on the road before the government spokesman arrived. When Gerry et al returned from the police station, the world's press were on their doorstep. All that phoning home by the parents and their friends had us all waking up to the news that Madeleine had been abducted, and Gerry and Kate were responsible parents.
You seem very lackadaisical about the real abductors of Madeleine being caught and brought to trial. Among the multitude of reasons you so thoughtfully put forward for no abductor ever being found is the involvement of a foreign government, MI5 and all sorts. And that the case is 'too big' for the police to handle, perhaps Scotland Yard could borrow Trump's Spaceforce. Hang on Maddie Captain Kirk and Mr. Spock are on the way.
A procurer? A procurer acting on behalf of important people. If important people want a child they adopt one. See Madonna and Angelina Joli. Important people don't want a child who can never be seen in public, never go to school, never receive medical treatment. The presumably highly paid procurer had the option of two babies, a boy or a girl, so why go for the older child?
You think the public's suspicion of the M<Canns is orchestrated by the government on behalf of the real perpetrators of the crime. People so important no-one knows who or what they are?
But I' play along....
Foreign operatives (KGB? Assassins on behalf of MBA?)flew out to a holiday village on the Algarve to steal a 4 year old girl? Not just any 4 year old girl but Madeleine McCann. Being the luckiest foreign operatives in the world, the parents of Madeleine conveniently went out every evening leaving the apartment unlocked and the children unattended which just happened to fit in with their masterplan.
DeleteYou talk about the police as if everyone below the rank of DCI has been lobotomised. It's insulting. These police officers are living, breathing human beings with consciences and dedication to their job. What you suggest would go against everything they have sworn to uphold.
No police investigation has a remit to cover up crimes. Look at the trouble Trump is having with the FBI and CIA, because they will not lie and cover for him.
As for 'show you another case that has received so much funding etc'. You are right, nothing compares. Actually I can't think of any crime abroad where the government has been so closely involved. Possibly to the point of perverting the course of justice, this is another case where 'go easy on them' could be pivotal in a trial.
Finally, I think your alternate option btw, is highly likely.
We're all being manipulated to a certain degree. That's the function of television and the internet.Everything is stage managed for dramatic or melodramatic effect and maximum impact.Most of what we see from mainstream outlets is bullshit.People are rarely themselves on camera. I don't mean actors, they're supposed to be someone else. The recent obsession with 'reality' TV show's us two things ; people are too ready to be fake for effect and attention and even more are ready to be voyeurs so they have something in their life they can talk about.The McCann case was a breath of fresh air to the anger junkies. They were never going to be held back by little details like the need for proof or evidence. They had two people they didn't like the look of. Then it was two people with good jobs and lifestyles.They were ready to watch every move and listen to every sentence with one aim ; to find something in them that confirms their bias.
Delete''I'm not buying the global campaign is something the McCanns 'went along with'. The show was well on the road before the government spokesman arrived. ''
If the McCanns were behind it they wouldn't have needed the Government's man and all the media control.He had years of experience in spin and media. They were doctors.
I'm not lackadaisacal regarding the abductors being found or caught. I was merely sharing the possibilities i go with. A missing child is a police matter. That's a fact. MI 5 are about national security.Why would national security be an issue in a missing child case ? The over- involvement of PMs etc suggest even more that it wasn't being regarded as a crime for the police to solve.Or even investigate.That's why nothing was left for them and the case closed then.
''A procurer? A procurer acting on behalf of important people. If important people want a child they adopt one. See Madonna and Angelina Joli. ''
See Jimmy Savile. See Tim Fortescue( above link).
''Important people don't want a child who can never be seen in public, never go to school, never receive medical treatment. The presumably highly paid procurer had the option of two babies, a boy or a girl, so why go for the older child?''
Are you being naive for effect ? Procurers who fins these kids for important people aren't procuring them to be family. See Margaret Hodge and Tony Blair's Islington scandal.See Lord Havers gagging the 80s press.
''You think the public's suspicion of the M<Canns is orchestrated by the government on behalf of the real perpetrators of the crime. People so important no-one knows who or what they are?''
That's the theory i believe would explain the concern of two opposing governments, 4 Prime Ministers, MI5, a politician- turned- media controller. The home secretaries who have rubber stamped every cheque.It would explain the absence of incriminating forensic evidence, the absence of arrests, and the 12 years of blanks the PJ and Met have drawn. I'm open to alternative explanations that would explain all of the above. Like explanations of what kind of leverage the McCanns and friends could possibly have on the PM and elite that allowed them to call in a favour this big. My theory doesn't sound so outlandish when you look at that alternative.
KGB ? You've been spending far too long looking at american BS online..Trump wold love you...
DeleteNone of that happened in another part of Europe in the Marc Dutroux case. But plenty of elite were involved.Judges on the case were found murdered.No KGB there.Just procurers, kids and the elite.Or, what about the 'high society paedophile ring' known as the Casa Pia case in Portugal 2010.Are we forgetting those ? Don't they involve enough parents....
''You talk about the police as if everyone below the rank of DCI has been lobotomised. It's insulting.''
Ten years ago it was announced that the force were raising their standards. In future they'd have to have a GCSE. Give me two weeks and i could get a chimp a GCSE. besides, the point i was making was about rank, not brains.Those upstairs don't 'talk' to those a floor below.That's how the pyramid structure works.You son't question those above.
''No police investigation has a remit to cover up crimes. Look at the trouble Trump is having with the FBI and CIA, because they will not lie and cover for him. ''
How many more simple ways are there for me to explain that they wouldn't knowingly cover up the crime but wouldn't be aware that those above have already done it ? Screw Trump, screw the CIA and FBI. In an ideal world they'd wipe each other out like in the movies they imitate.
Think about this. This case has been more public than any before it and the scope of it's reach far greater than any before it.It's had more public input via the internet and news media and there's been more anger directed at the parents than the JonBenet case.If the parents were ever arrested what chances are there of finding 12 people without a knowledge of the case they have gleaned from the internet ?A place that might have a few pieces of truth but mountains of lies and opinions.Nobody would expect a jury to 'set aside all pre-conceptions' and any appeal against a guilty verdict would use that.That's truly the worst case scenario for the parents. Them being demoted from patsies to the accused.won't happen. Not now.
( here's a link..bjorn,,you may be interested too )
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/guilty-after-six-year-trial-portugals-high-society-paedophile-ring-2070112.html
Hi anon 4 March 2019 at 22:48
DeleteThanks, for the link. I'll look a little deeper into this and see what I can make out of it.
'' But that's because we don't know what they are doing and they don't want us or the suspects to know what they are doing, ''
ReplyDeleteWhat - every year ? Seven years ? That's longer than either of the great wars. Get real.
Ros says: "That doesn't seem to be the relationship the McCanns have with Operation Grange. Going by the McCann supporters on here, the parents are pissed off with OG. The parents being pissed off is perfectly understandable, more understandable than the parents being extremely grateful."
ReplyDeleteI am a Mccann supporter who comments on here and I have never said or implied any of that. I am certainly not aware that the Mccanns are "pissed off" with OG.
----------------------------------------------
Ros says: "What do the parents have to thank OG for? As a previous poster pointed out, they kept them as public enemies, they have done nothing to raise that cloud of suspicion from over them. They want their daughter back and the abductor found, none of which has happened, or looks likely to happen so what exactly are they extremely grateful for?"
You refuse to accept that OG and the Portuguese police have specifically stated that the Mccanns are not suspects.
"I don't accept the nonsense that OG are sticking to 'an abduction as if it were here in the UK'. No police investigation works in that way, they go where the evidence leads them."
ReplyDeleteIf the evidence took them to criminal activity by a UK policeman of Superintendent rank or above, who would have the seniority of rank in OG to investigate.
DCI Redwood/Wall certainly have not
"For the police, the more witnesses talk the better, they would not turn a witness away"
The official Leics police website clearly stated, give any information you have to us, or to the McCanns own investigators.(the Mccanns were official suspects at this time)
This is a fact whether you want to accept it or not.
"If the police are covering up for the McCanns JJ, then why aren't the McCanns co-operating with them? I am afraid that is the big flaw in the whole 'OG is a cover up' argument"
The police are not covering up for the Mccanns they are covering up their own criminality and abject failure as police officers.
Since OG began the Mccanns have had at least two provable private meetings with the Home Secretary,one with the PM and one with the Assistant Commissioner of Scotland Yard.
Out in the cold the Mccanns, where is the evidence?
You are very harsh on the police JJ, especially since we know so little.
DeleteI've never heard of this 'two provable private meetings with the Home Secretary, one with the PM and One with Assistant Commissioner of Scotland Yard. Which Home Secretary, which PM? I have seen pictures of Kate with Theresa May, but that was a social gathering, and they didn't look particularly close. Remember Theresa May fell out with their main defender Jim Gamble, he lost his job as head of CEOP and it is highly unlikely his report was used as the basis for the Review ordered by Theresa May, as Home Secretary.
Why would police covering up their own criminality involve so many other police in that criminality? The objective of a cover up is to have as few people know about it as possible. Even at this stage, 12 years on, OG are still announcing (publicly) their requests for further funding. And to be honest, who if anyone is asking? Would the public miss those announcements if they weren't made? Probably not. Far from hiding away to conceal their crimes, they are keeping their investigation in the public eye. That is, the opposite of a cover up.
The police are the most loyal of the freemasonic brotherhood.They swear an oath of blood. None of them step out of line. The greater cause is too important. It doesn't matter what they have to cover up or why-they do it. They only admit it if outsiders expose them. Like so many old cases that shows their refusal to arrest Lord Janner, Cyril Smith, Jimmy Savile and anyone involved in the Islington childrens home in the 80s. They wouldn't have coughed to any of that from the inside.
DeleteThey aren't keeping the investigation in the public eye, they're keeping the announcements in it. Telling the public that they're investigating doesn't mean they are. Telling us what they're investigating or what and who they have already investigated does .
OG and the Portuguese police stating the McCanns are not suspects is pretty meaningless. The last official word on the case came from the Portuguese Supreme Court that pointed out the McCanns were never cleared by the Portuguese police of involvement in their daughter's disappearance.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting to read that you are in behind the scenes communication with your fans Ros.
ReplyDeletethat sounds enigmatic 10:59. What are the actual 'scenes' she's behind ?
DeleteYes I'd quite like to know too 12:53 lol. Aah well there's only one thing worse than being talked about, and that's not being talked about ;)
Delete@ Anonymous4 March 2019 at 12:53 and Ros 21:07
DeleteRos said: "Aah SYIACM, sadly your post telling me how wonderful I am didn't make it to this page and I can't find it :( It's a shame because I keep having to return to postbox version of it"
The front facing scene of this blog are the comments and replies that are posted and replied to - that everyone can see.
The behind the scenes is correspondence between Ros and her fans that does not get published on here.
It's a one way street, I can't reply to them.
Deleteall very howsyerfather
Deleteruth bashford4 March 2019 at 07:14
ReplyDelete''OG and the Portuguese police stating the McCanns are not suspects is pretty meaningless. The last official word on the case came from the Portuguese Supreme Court that pointed out the McCanns were never cleared by the Portuguese police of involvement in their daughter's disappearance.''
The supreme court have never been investigating the case. The Met and PJ have and OG have been reviewing it.Only their word is official and meaningful. If the court had more weight or influence they wouldn't have made that announcement without first consulting the court. Remind yourself that the summing up in court was to elaborate on the right to publish a book.it wasn't a criminal trial. The McCann case involving a missing child is a crime, ergo, criminal investigation.If anything ever happens to solve the case there'll be a criminal trial.
I'm pretty certain if Gerry and Kate had won their case against Goncalo Amaral, they would have claimed they had been proved innocent. For them victory against GA would have destroyed the credibility of GA's book and buried his 'they did it' theory forever.
DeleteBut as we know, that's not what happened. You are right however, there is a difference between a Civil and a Criminal case and the criminal side was not on trial. However, the Judges, for whatever reason, decided to add that caveat. Perhaps they added that caveat because they didn't want the McCanns to use their [the Judges] decision as a ruling of innocence for them. Or of course they could just have been saying 'we don't believe you'.
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 March 2019 at 21:00
Delete''I'm pretty certain if Gerry and Kate had won their case against Goncalo Amaral, they would have claimed they had been proved innocent.''
They claimed it before it went to court. They claimed it after the ruling. They still claim it. But now the police have confirmed that they're innocent as well.
'' For them victory against GA would have destroyed the credibility of GA's book and buried his 'they did it' theory forever.''
The only 'credibility' his book has is down to thousands of gullible readers who want the parents to be guilty.Those who read material objectively and can spot the difference between fact and opinion easily give his ideas no credence. I suggest that no detectives give them credence either. Otherwise they'd have used the book as a source of information to help close the case.
''However, the Judges, for whatever reason, decided to add that caveat. Perhaps they added that caveat because they didn't want the McCanns to use their [the Judges] decision as a ruling of innocence for them. Or of course they could just have been saying 'we don't believe you'.''
The caveat was clearly added in order to explain the ruling. It was to emphasise that the opinions expressed in the book have not been able to lead to anything in the actual case.That the book shouldn't be used to prop up an argument of innocent of a crime or guilty of a crime. It was about freedom of speech only.Amaral won the right to say anything he liked without being called to back himself up. That's all.Even if he had lost, the case couldn't be used as an argument for innocence.It was about freedom of speech. Not a crime committed.
The caveat said all that eh? and without any words, amazing.
DeleteJudges do not people they can't use quotes from a book as fact. The Judges did not say 'the book shouldn't be used to prop up an argument......', That's all in your head, what you hoped they had said. Judges don't rule on how a book should be read or used, lol, the idea is ridiculous and meaningless.
So the whole case was about freedom of speech eh? GA's Freedom of Speech presumably, because no-one has threatened to take that freedom away from Gerry and Kate. They feel so passionately about GA having the right to Freedom of Speech, they spent 10 long years plus fighting him in the Courts and probably the next 10 trying to fight him in the ECHRs.
Sorry I don't believe it is about Freedom of Speech. GA's book has been out for a decade at least, the genie is way too big now to go back in the bottle. The book cannot be unread by the hundreds of thousands who have read it. There is no point now in taking away GA's Freedom of Speech, the damage, if there was any, was too long ago everyone has moved on. Now it is just spite and that is not endearing.
The link of the translation of the ruling is on your previous blog. using the words .The judge must have had a reason to remind the public that the contents within its pages had not been used to investigate or solve the case. What would that be do you think ?Maybe in anticipation of fanatics constantly citing it as evidence of the parents guilt ? Of course it was. Live with it.
DeleteThe judge said it was acceptable to allow the publication on the grounds of Amaral's right to free speech and to voice an opinion.That's fact. I don't agree with it myself but i know it's a fact that the ruling stated it.
''Sorry I don't believe it is about Freedom of Speech. ''
Are you suggesting that the judge lied just because she didn't have the McCanns flung into a cell ?
It doesn't matter about genies being out of bottles. So what ? This particular genie is a nutcase but it harms nobody.It just doesn't grant any wishes to it's owner or his loyal zombatic followers.
''his [Amaral] pride and honour, as a professional of the criminal investigation police – to expose his vision of the facts, and therefore the publication of said book has to be considered a legitimate exercise of the right to an opinion.''
( the judge)
''Nothing opposes that, although they have not been deemed sufficient to lead to a criminal charge, said facts are subject to diverse appreciation, namely in a work of literary nature.''
( the judge)
http://pjga.blogspot.com/2016/04/translation-of-conclusions-of-appellate.html
( the link)
'' it is just spite and that is not endearing.''
DeleteBut using a book and your position as a former co-ordinating detective on the case to make money is wonderful. To fill it with salacious meanderings and malicious lies that allege that the parents who lost their child killed her or buried her is up the with Hans Christian Andersen.Nice .
Hi Rosalinda and others
ReplyDeletejust a few words
I don’t understand why the McCanns haven’t been interested in taking part in the upcoming Netflix documentary, as it would give them yet another chance to tell their story, which certainly would make even more people take interest in the case. What about another nice and cosy scene in which a little smiling and look-alike Madeleine girl is sitting splashing her small feet in the Ocean Club pool, just as Madeleine did in her last photo. Wouldn’t that illustrate how sudden paradise can turn into hell.
Showing the back of a fleeing and smirking perpetrator hurrying down the street with a drugged child in his arms would make quite a few people, who’re disgusted with all the paedophiles, gypsies and other dregs, who constantly pose a threat to British children in Portugal, demand more actions from the police. I’ve actually lost count of how many children there’re in the Algarve region, who have been abused, raped or kidnapped since Madeleine went missing in 2007. Does anyone know?
Björn (18:01)
Delete(I don’t understand why the McCanns haven’t been interested in taking part in the upcoming Netflix documentary..)
The McCanns will be represented?
September 10, 2018
https://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/northern-ireland/the-tragedy-that-saw-my-catholic-best-friend-killed-shortly-after-we-joined-the-army-the-routine-uncommon-valour-i-witnessed-in-the-ruc-and-why-i-believe-well-find-out-what-happened-to-madeleine-mccann-37298424.html
Q: "You've been working on a documentary series that Netflix has just finished on the Madeleine McCann case; that's going out later in the year. Do you think we'll ever know what happened there?"
Jim Gamble: "I've got to know her parents over the years. And when you see parents having to get up every day, knowing that their child is missing, with the responsibility towards their other two children - the only thing that keeps them going, in my opinion, is hope. So I'm never going to give an opinion that I think Madeleine is dead.
At the end of the day, we don't know. And I've been in this work long enough to know that many years later children are found again.
That hope fuels people's ability to put one foot in front of the other. I believe it's a case where we'll find out what happened to Madeleine in my lifetime.
I genuinely believe that.
I will always harbour the hope that it's good news."
why you on about paedophiles and gypsies again bjorn. You're obsessed.
DeleteWow Björn - don't hide your hate will you!
DeleteHello anon 4 March 2019 at 20:34
DeleteThanks for comment and thanks for links
"So I'm never going to give an opinion that I think Madeleine is dead"
Despite what "hopes" Jim Gamble harbours, there was scent of death in the McCanns' apartment, forensic findings in the car, which matched 15 markers of 19 in Madeleine's DNA profile, two toddlers likely to have been sedated, even Kate and Gerry have admitted that this could've happened to Madeleine as well. We should also keep Mr Redwood's suspicion about Madeleine perhaps not having left the apartment alive in mind.
Either Jim Gamble is deliberately trying to pervert the course of justice, though he seems to have less power now than in the early days, or he's just as stupid as he looks.
Bjorn. If you persist in ignoring or dismissing the reports that came from the team of forensic scientists that confirm there is insufficient evidence from the crime scene, you can't expect anyone to take you and your embittered nonsense seriously. You lie and you invent. Now you accuse Gamble of breaking the law.Freedom of speech is a double edged sword.We see that when you and your ilk speak.
DeleteThank you for that quote 20:34.
DeleteJim sounds more like an evangelical than a tough former police chief. Where are his threats to the abductors along the lines of 'you will be caught' or 'we will track you down', the kind of fighting talk he had when he appeared on the breakfast TV sofas with Gerry and Kate. And to top it all, he appears to have no faith whatsoever in his former police colleagues who are still working on the investigation.
The case summed up and solved by bjorn :
DeleteThe parents are liars.
Smithman's a liar
Jim Gamble's a liar
Mark Grime's a liar
A Redwood - Liar
C Mitchel - liar
Forensics team - liars
D Payne - liar and 'creepy'
Tapas group- all liars
The dogs - they don't lie.
Conclusion : Aim all the accusations and poison in the direction of the parents only, arrest them and charge them with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice, the concealment of a body, fraud and perjury.And, of course killing their child.Arrest their friend and charge them with perverting the course of justice, perjury and the concealment of a crime. Arrest all 'on suspicion' of abusing a child. Don't bother with producing a single iota of proof to court as we can't find one.
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 March 2019 at 12:53
Delete''Thank you for that quote 20:34.
Jim sounds more like an evangelical than a tough former police chief.''
You're very predictable in regard to your comments on the police.When they are criticised for apparently doing nothing or covering up the truth, you remind everyone how human they are . You protect their honour. Why ? Because to consider a cover up for those high up takes the parents you hate out of the frame ? You defend Amaral, a convicted perjure, as he has a book full of accusations against the same parents- but can't prove a word.
You attack Gamble. One of your less vicious insults being this one on this thread - he's 'evangelical'. Why ? Because he's in the parents' corner and talks about holding on to hope to get you through each day.To hold on to hope to keep you strong. In other words, he's being human. But not for you. You judge anyone and everyone by one measure. Do they think bad of Kate and Gerry McCann or do they think they are innocent until proven guilty. Anyone who thinks badly of them is ok in your books.Those who don't are 'batshit crazy' etc. Tell me again about your logic and reasoning when you have a spare 30 seconds...
Please make sense of 'those high up' for me. Whoever do you mean? Who is so high up they can steal a child and get HM Government to cover it up for them? Not to mention 30+ homicide detectives?
DeleteIs being compared to an evangelical an insult? The idea that there is still hope certainly takes a lot of blind faith. Cops usually deal in reality.
Hope is actually a very negative emotion. I always remember a scene in 'Clockwise' where John Cleese is sat by the roadside, dressed as a monk, with a slight possibly he could get to his meeting. He cursed 'hope' for the havoc it creates, and I have to say, I had to agree with him.
Hope unfortunately prevents closure. It means the McCanns can never go back to a peaceful family life, nor can they mourn for their daughter and let her go. I actually think it is quite cruel to tell parents in the McCanns' situation that there is hope. They are perpetually held in limbo, they cannot move on.
I'm sorry if I appear to be harsh on supporters of the McCanns, but if you look through the posts and my replies, I answer like with like. I don't mean I start chucking out insults, not my way at all, in fact I go out of my way to accommodate the particularly angry. I fear however, you take my good humour as a wind up
@13:35
DeleteIt's all to do with her famous faith in human nature and seeing the good in people lol
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 March 2019 at 14:08
Delete''Please make sense of 'those high up' for me. Whoever do you mean? Who is so high up they can steal a child and get HM Government to cover it up for them? Not to mention 30+ homicide detectives?''
You want names ? lol My definition of 'high up' is anyone who is a member of Parliament or above. Why were so many MPs kept out of trouble by colluding politicians and police ( Janner, Smith, Thorpe,Britton,Freud).I point you towards the Islington homes scandal of the 80s, the gaging of the press by Havers and the protection of procurer extraordinaire Savile and the confession of Tim Fortescue but you won't look.Don't be lazy.
''Is being compared to an evangelical an insult? The idea that there is still hope certainly takes a lot of blind faith. Cops usually deal in reality.''
In the context you used the phrase it was an insult.You know it. I know it.
''Hope is actually a very negative emotion. I always remember a scene in 'Clockwise' where John Cleese is sat by the roadside''
You're using fiction again. Hope isn't actually an emotion at all. It's more a state of mind.It's true to say those who live on hope usually dies hungry.But when you're at the bottom you'll try anything to keep from giving up.
''Hope unfortunately prevents closure. It means the McCanns can never go back to a peaceful family life, nor can they mourn for their daughter and let her go. I actually think it is quite cruel to tell parents in the McCanns' situation that there is hope. They are perpetually held in limbo, they cannot move on.''
Finding their child, dead or alive, will bring closure.Hope keeps them strong while they wait.
''I'm sorry if I appear to be harsh on supporters of the McCanns, but if you look through the posts and my replies, I answer like with like... I don't mean I start chucking out insults, not my way at all,..I fear however, you take my good humour as a wind up''
You don't have to apologise for being harsh on anyone if you believe they genuinely ask for it by being stupid or ignorant.But for merely disagreeing with you it's unacceptable.if you have the bullets shoot them.As for humour, i preferred to think you wouldn't find humour in the discussion of whether two parents are guilty of burying their child and convincing all the police and forensics and politicians to go with it..
@Björn4 March 2019 at 18:01
ReplyDelete''I don’t understand why the McCanns haven’t been interested in taking part in the upcoming Netflix documentary, as it would give them yet another chance to tell their story,''
Who doesn't know the story ? Just because it's been twelve years doesn't mean it's twelve years worth of detail.What we learned in 2007 hasn't been added to.The same can be said for those investigating the case ( OG especially). If we ever begin to forget, we get top- up reminders via the mainstream liars about the 'need' for funding etc.The McCanns aren't silly. They must know Netflix or any TV station or studio can't change anything in terms of progress. It begins to look distasteful.
The attempt at the cynical didn't work well there bjorn. We all know how Paradise can turn into Hell in the blink of an eye. We don'y need your sly digs at the smiling little girl .
''Showing the back of a fleeing and smirking perpetrator hurrying down the street with a drugged child in his arms would make quite a few people, who’re disgusted with all the paedophiles, gypsies and other dregs,''
Wow, it took you until paragraph three to mention paedohilia. You're improving. The image of a 'smirking perpetrator' is ridiculous. I know you're trying to convey the image as a silent movie one in order that nobody considers it as realistic, but it's in bad taste.As usual.Who says there was a drugged child ? What drug was it- I haven't read that in any file. care to share ?By the way, it only takes on abductor to abduct. It doesn't mean a town is lousy with them.
''I’ve actually lost count of how many children there’re in the Algarve region, who have been abused, raped or kidnapped since Madeleine went missing in 2007. Does anyone know?''
I wonder why you'd be interested in that.You're asking in the wrong arena. I'm sure you can find some like minded types if you do the work.
Hi anon4 March 2019 at 21:21
Delete"why you on about paedophiles and gypsies again bjorn. You're obsessed"
Hi anon 4 March 2019 at 20:18
"Wow, it took you until paragraph three to mention paedohilia"
None of you two (I suppose you're different persons) seem to be able to read between the lines and irony is definitely not your strongest point.
The McCanns were looking for Madeleine in Morocco, and with a little help from their spokesman they managed to find a poor Roman family in the countryside, who had a little daughter, of whom they took a photo, which was then manipulated and photo-shopped before it was spread in media, making people believe that this could be Madeleine.
A small Bulgarian Roman girl, whom a Greek Roman family had taken care of was used in the same way. Disgusting! What else can I say?
As far as the suspicion about paedophiles being involved, it is the McCanns themselves who’ve been obsessed with such ideas, in that they’ve described Madeleine as a desirable object for paedophiles, by publishing photos of such kinds and by expressing concern about what may have happened to her genitals (Kate’s book).
I’m not obsessed with Madeleine’s beauty, paedophile rings, child traffickers selling Madeleine as a sex slave or Gypsies having stolen her, but the McCanns are and that’s why I keep on talking about it.
There’s no place om earth where Madeleine could live today and be happy. So all those believing and hoping that she’s still alive, should at least try to imagine what her situation would be, if that would be the case.
Björn (13:15)
Delete"As far as the suspicion about paedophiles being involved, it is the McCanns themselves who’ve been obsessed with such ideas..."
The McCanns promoted the idea; possibly, scripted by someone else to attract attention.
Hello anon 5 March 2019 at 16:37
Delete"The McCanns promoted the idea; possibly, scripted by someone else to attract attention"
Yes,thanks. Good remark. That was actually what I meant.
Hello again Anon 4 March 2019 at 20:18
Delete"what drug was it- I haven't read that in any file. care to share ?"
Unfortunatly we will never get to know that my friend, as Kate, who suspected that the twins might've been drugged, just as she thought Madeleine could've been, didn't take their two toddlers to hospital for a medical examination.
In not doing so, she gambled with their lives by just letting them go on sleeping, hoping that they would wake up the next morning, but (it must be said)she didn't care a shit about what they'd be given and how it could've been done.
"Are you aware of that you're jeopardizing the investigation", Kate was as an arguido, and she answered; Yes, if that's what the investigation thinks/believes.
Kate cares a lot about herself, as does Gerry, but none of them really care so much about their own children.
Björn5 March 2019 at 19:25
Delete"what drug was it- I haven't read that in any file. care to share ?"
''Unfortunatly we will never get to know that my friend, as Kate, who suspected that the twins might've been drugged, just as she thought Madeleine could've been, didn't take their two toddlers to hospital for a medical examination. ''
So we don't actually 'know' there were drugs present in any of the babies. You sort of 'invented' that one. It could have been that they were drugged-in which case the parents would have been arrested.Or maybe there wasn't a drug present. In which case the parents remain as victims of a probable abduction. The parents' minds would have been racing. There would be fear, panic and sheer desperation going on. It's understandable why she didn't coolly say goodnight to the PJ and took her kids to a hospital. What isn't as understandable was that the PJ observed the calm and deep sleep the babies were in despite the chaos all around them and the screaming, but they didn't test them. Normal protocol given the circumstances wouldn't you say ?
''In not doing so, she gambled with their lives by just letting them go on sleeping, ''
But the police, who were supposed to be detached and calm didn't gamble ?
''she didn't care a shit about what they'd be given and how it could've been done.''
I thought we had just established that there was no record of any drugs being in the system of either baby. So what was there for her to 'not give a shit' about ? You're making things up, believing them, then getting angry at what you imagined. Are you ever able to be objective about anything ?
''"Are you aware of that you're jeopardizing the investigation", Kate was as an arguido, and she answered; Yes, if that's what the investigation thinks/believes.''
She didn't say she believed it.She said she was aware that the investigation believed it. Big, big difference.
''Kate cares a lot about herself, as does Gerry, but none of them really care so much about their own children.''
A complete guess and lie. You can't know. have you any evidence of it or just a warped opinion ? have the twins emailed you or told you ? Or are they happy in their home and with their life ? Use evidence to support your answer.
Hello Anonymous5 March 2019 at 22:17
DeleteWe've enough evidence of Kate suspecting that the twins had been drugged and we know, don't we, that she didn't do anything about it. So what the police did or did not in that situation is no excuse for Kate ignoring her own surviving children's state of health.
Björn6 March 2019 at 12:32
Delete''We've enough evidence of Kate suspecting that the twins had been drugged and we know, don't we, that she didn't do anything about it''
I questioned why the police failed to do anything.Why would they not have the children tested ? Is the evidence you're selling of Kate saying on the actual night that she thought her kids were drugged. or much later on ?
Björn5 March 2019 at 18:54
DeleteHello anon 5 March 2019 at 16:37
"The McCanns promoted the idea; possibly, scripted by someone else to attract attention"
Yes,thanks. Good remark. That was actually what I meant.''
but what you actually said was :
"As far as the suspicion about paedophiles being involved, it is the McCanns themselves who’ve been obsessed with such ideas.''
So you took the scriptwiters' obsession with paedophiles and decided to blame the McCanns and say the obsession was there's.You don't even know when you're lying now do you..
Björn5 March 2019 at 13:15
Delete''I’m not obsessed with Madeleine’s beauty, paedophile rings, child traffickers selling Madeleine as a sex slave or Gypsies having stolen her, but the McCanns are and that’s why I keep on talking about it. ''
Anonymous5 March 2019 at 16:37
''The McCanns promoted the idea; possibly, scripted by someone else to attract attention.''
Björn5 March 2019 at 18:54
''Yes,thanks. Good remark. That was actually what I meant.''
So we've established that it wasn't the McCanns who obsessed about paedophiles and gypsies-you made it up.You ( allegedly) meant their scriptwriters.Which removes your other weak excuse of not being obsessed but still 'keep on talking about it'. What's your new excuse..
That was perhaps the biggest lie the world was being sold Bjorn, the idea that children are regularly stolen from their beds, especially in the Algarve. It was a wicked lie that directly affected the people of PDL, many Warners employees lost their jobs. I don't know how anyone could live with that on their conscience, they punished the town that took care of them and they searched for Madeleine while the parents and their friends sat around the pool and played tennis. Gerry and Kate know how much they sold their former friends out, it's no wonder they never return there.
ReplyDeleteRosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 March 2019 at 20:36
ReplyDelete''That was perhaps the biggest lie the world was being sold Bjorn, the idea that children are regularly stolen from their beds, especially in the Algarve. It was a wicked lie that directly affected the people of PDL,''
Biggest lie in the world ? Who created it and put it up for sale ? Are we going to find a way to blame the parents ? It isn't such a mighty leap of imagination to accept a child who has been seen to be left alone at night, in a quiet place away from the main roads could take the eye of some procurer or sick predator.That doesn't mean it happens in all homes does it ? I can think of a bigger and more dangerous lie. How about the one that almost all children who meet a tragic end do so due to one or both of their parents or a family member.It basically states that every night a child is safe at home they're in a more dangerous place than the street.Kids can read too.
Who punished the town ? How ?
''Gerry and Kate know how much they sold their former friends out, it's no wonder they never return there.''
Would you want to return to the place that only holds your worst memories ? Would you like to relive the agony ? Of course you would. For the sake of what you're tying to sell here, naturally. Not for anything that stands up to scrutiny. Apart from that, your final paragraph is just a slanderous allegation. Unless you can back it up of course. it's just another opinion of two strangers you hold and unfounded and irrational hatred of. You and bjorn scream the same language.Throw jc into the mix and that's pretty much the size of the army you've taken 10 years plus to build with your reasoning.Sorry, musing.
Q: "You've been working on a documentary series that Netflix has just finished on the Madeleine McCann case; that's going out later in the year. Do you think we'll ever know what happened there?"
ReplyDeleteJim Gamble: "I've got to know her parents over the years. And when you see parents having to get up every day..."
?
Interesting 9:02, so did Jim Gamble take part?
DeleteWould I return to a place that holds such terrible memories? Hell yeah, I would never give up the search in the place where she disappeared, especially if I believed she was still alive.
DeleteAs for irrational hatred of two strangers. I don't hate Gerry and Kate, I don't know them. I don't like that they blame everyone else and that they show no remorse. To be fair, there is nothing about them that I find endearing.
All of that however does not equate to irrational hate. When I study a subject I try to keep emotions out of it, and stick with logic and reasoning. Actually I take umbrage at your allegation that my views are irrational.
Despite the fact that I am probably a raving loon in every other area of my life, when problem solving I strictly adhere to reasoning and logic and carefully examining both sides of the argument. And yes, I have carefully considered the McCanns side of the story and watched the interviews. I usually opt to give people the benefit of the doubt, but with so many interviews, all the doubt was removed.
My slanderous accusation btw, came from Kate's book, where she goes to great lengths to excuse Gerry's tennis playing. Sat around the pool, comes from Jez Wilkins, that's where they were when he bid them farewell on the Saturday.
You see 21:09, it's that kind of thing that is not likeable.
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 March 2019 at 12:17
Delete''Would I return to a place that holds such terrible memories? Hell yeah, I would never give up the search in the place where she disappeared, especially if I believed she was still alive. ''
You wouldn't. Nobody would. You're pretending you would to make your case look stronger. It kids nobody.
''As for irrational hatred of two strangers. I don't hate Gerry and Kate, I don't know them.''
Your hatred is palpable.That they're strangers and you know nothing about them confirm how irrational it is.
''When I study a subject I try to keep emotions out of it, and stick with logic and reasoning. ''
You really need to try much harder then. You use guesswork and bias to formulate as many negative opinions about the two strangers as you can. You never entertain the possibility that you could be wrong or your allegations and opinions need some evidence to support them.Logic and reasoning tell us that in this case there is no evidence whatsoever of a crime.None of a death. None of an assault.The police would have brought it to court had their been.Your reasoning and logic ignores that fact and prefers to hold on to what you consider is incriminating evidence all over the case.But you're not biased...
'', I have carefully considered the McCanns side of the story and watched the interviews. ''
You haven't and won't. A reading of random blogs here confirms that. You close your eyes and ears to common sense and logic because they expose the flaws throughout your so called reasoning.The police watch and conduct interviews.You watch TV and youtube.You trust your own word rather than the police's refusal to arrest anyone.
''My slanderous accusation btw, came from Kate's book, where she goes to great lengths to excuse Gerry's tennis playing.''
If you can prove a link between playing tennis and burying children the FBI have a job for you.
''You see 21:09, it's that kind of thing that is not likeable.''
Whereas hurling unfounded allegations at people is full of charm.
Had Madeleine died in PDL I could understand the parents not wanting to go back. But they think she is alive. I read a story once about a man who's daughter disappeared. He returns to the area regularly to hand out flyers and walk through the streets even though two decades have gone by.
DeleteWho are you to tell me what I wouldn't do, I am the better judge of that, you don't know me.
As for my 'hatred' being palpable and I know nothing about them [the McCanns]'. Unfortunately I know way too much about them. I've read Kate's book, I've Gerry's blogs, I've seen all the interviews and the Sun pullout on how Kate couldn't make love to Gerry. They, the parents, put their lives under the public spotlight, they invited the media in. Heck, they even paid Lord Bell £500k to keep them on the front pages for a year.
As far as the police position is concerned, I don't see it as a refusal to arrest anyone, I see it as an ongoing investigation.
Haha on the FBI gag, but playing tennis while others search for your daughter is astonishing, and not in a good way.
Please stop with the 'unfounded'. My suspicions are founded on the abduction story not being believable and the very strange behaviour of the parents that you see as perfectly normal.
Your problem lies in the fact that I challenge the disinformation and negative propaganda put out by the parents and those acting on their behalf. The parents have been largely successful in silencing the MSM, and most of the forums and facebook pages have imploded.
They spent hundreds of thousands trying to shut up Barmy Bennett, but they haven't been able to touch my 'unbound' blog and my audience is growing all the time.
I won't stand by and watch lies being sold as the truth. The McCann publicity campaign has been a nasty, murky, sinister campaign from the off. The tragedy of Brenda Leyland was just the top layer of the iceberg, the Myths sites were bullying and intimidating strangers online for years.
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 March 2019 at 13:38
Delete''Had Madeleine died in PDL I could understand the parents not wanting to go back. But they think she is alive. I read a story once about ....''
Bla bla..a story that related to the McCann case or not at all ? So the fact that Madeleine was only stolen means it's ok.That doesn't count as a tragedy because at least she could still be alive. Ms Compassion herself. PDL is a very small place. Tiny. If it was Singapore, fair enough. But do you think anyone who abducted her would stay in such a tiny place that is now famous for the abduction ? You think that ?
''Who are you to tell me what I wouldn't do, I am the better judge of that, you don't know me. ''
I know a lie when i see one. You presented more than a mere pen portrait on here over the years.
''As for my 'hatred' being palpable and I know nothing about them [the McCanns]'. Unfortunately I know way too much about them. I've read Kate's book''
You call the book fiction but call on it to support things from it you decide are fact.Was the book an autobiography or about her child ?
'' I've Gerry's blogs, I've seen all the interviews and the Sun pullout on how Kate couldn't make love to Gerry. They, the parents, ''
The Sun again. The thinking fools' tabloid. Good research, Ros. So the salacious tales about their sex life hints at them having buried their child. You should have been a detective.
''Please stop with the 'unfounded'. My suspicions are founded on the abduction story not being believable ''
The police believe it and they're on the inside of the investigation not online.
''Your problem lies in the fact that I challenge the disinformation and negative propaganda put out by the parents and those acting on their behalf''
My problem is that you claim that but can't support it.Prove the disinformation.
''They spent hundreds of thousands trying to shut up Barmy Bennett, but they haven't been able to touch my 'unbound' blog and my audience is growing all the time.''
Bennett isn't as important than he thinks or you think or anyone thinks. Your audience is very quiet.
''I won't stand by and watch lies being sold as the truth.'
Nor will I. That's why I ask you to back up each claim and accusation with fact instead of opinion.
''The tragedy of Brenda Leyland was just the top layer of the iceberg, the Myths sites were bullying and intimidating strangers online for years.''
You haven't resorted to using Brenda Leyland's name for a couple of weeks. You're improving. What are you using her for now ? The 'twitter war ' ? Or are you still trying to say a 'hit' was put out on the behalf of the McCanns ? If she hadn't died that would be bordering on the hilarious. As it is it;s merely sick but par for the course. Where's the attack on Sky TV and Twitter ? Brunt ? The Tories of that year and of governments past had been waging an offline war with online tweeters.All over the allegations made against Lord McCalpine and his odd brother and their questionable dealings in the past. McCalpine led the charge via mainstream about 'dealing with trolls'. He became braver once one case was proven to be mistaken identity ( his brother). He sued the BBC( on the face of it for headlines) to the tune of hundreds of thousands. He threatened all online 'conspiracy theorists' they'd face consequences( because all politicians 'laugh' at conspiracy theories and dismiss them as jokes).Some were put off, more weren't. When he died much was written of how the trolls and social networks had taken their toll on him. Shortly after a random tweeter was chosen to hold up as an example.But, let's blame the McCanns. We have all the evidence to do that.
@09:02
Delete“?”
Precisely.
W-t-P
You recognizes a lie when you see one. Seriously? Kate told one interviewer that she regularly goes back to PDL, keeping a low profile. She likes to walk through the streets looking at the faces. She didn't mention feelings of horror at having to return there.
DeleteI've never called Kate's book fiction - you can't just make things up. I'm guessing you have only recently learned the difference between fact and fiction, and you are now trying to bring into every debate. Her book is her account of the summer of 2007, The Truth of the Lie is GA's account. Neither are fiction.
As for my bring up Brenda Leyland, I will never be shy about mentioning her name. You forget that I personally, and indeed many others, saw the way in which the Myths operatives worked. They didn't suddenly become bullies when they targeted Brenda Leyland, they had been doing it for years. People need to know about the internet wars, because social media has played such a large part in this case. Why did Team McCann media monitors act like thugs?
We do have evidence that the McCanns et al were participating in the battles on social media. Michael Wright, bff of Gerry and Kate, stood in the witness box and explained how their media campaigning worked.
This 'everyone blames the McCanns' is the toddler approach to reasoning and discussion. It's just one step away from 'poor me'. The McCanns were running a media campaign, why can't you accept it and own it? Trying to pass it off to some mystery VIPs is senseless, just more pointless lies for the sake of it.
Anonymous5 March 2019 at 15:27
Delete'' @09:02
“?”
Precisely.
W-t-P''
Winsome old sossij...
I think the enigmatic yet shocking question mark you've both presented is supposed to be an expression of shock and feigned amazement about how the Gamble chap could 'see ' them get up every morning. Are we taking every phrase literally now ? he's a policemen not an English tutor. I think it was supposed to convey his admiration for people who could face each day under the strain they must surely be under.
A small loss to the pedants there...
Z of S
19 Apr 2007
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/technology/2007/apr/19/hitechcrime.money
"Operation Ore has become a byword for our police's investigation into the murkiest of online worlds - but hundreds, perhaps thousands, of the cases show that the police were misled and confused by criminals whose computer expertise was years ahead of theirs."
'You recognizes a lie when you see one. Seriously? Kate told one interviewer that she regularly goes back to PDL, keeping a low profile. She likes to walk through the streets looking at the faces. She didn't mention feelings of horror at having to return there.''
DeleteWas she asked ?
''I've never called Kate's book fiction - you can't just make things up.''
I'm not. You have.You call her a liar frequently and say everything she's said is a lie. You've never explained how you know they're lies though. It's more of a catharsis for you.
''As for my bring up Brenda Leyland, I will never be shy about mentioning her name. You forget that I personally, and indeed many others, saw the way in which the Myths operatives worked.''
Whatever the myths are they need to be proven as myths. Whoever the operatives were, need to be exposed by truth. One thing that isn't a myth is that Brenda Leyland is no longer alive.Another is that she needs to allowed to rest in peace and those who cant resist talking about her shouldn't do it just to bolster a petty argument they have.
'' People need to know about the internet wars''
Grow up, this is a missing child case.
'' Why did Team McCann media monitors act like thugs? ''
Why do over half of the many haters do the same against two people ?
''This 'everyone blames the McCanns' is the toddler approach to reasoning and discussion. It's just one step away from 'poor me'. ''
Is that your 'vicious child' personality at the keys again ? Nobody said what you're pretending they said. What I, and other normal people, say is that far too many blame the McCanns without having evidence or proof.Yet they won't explain why the police and forensics won't act on what they all call proof. Why not ? You think that normal, civilised people reminding you, and others like you, that innocence is always presumed until guilt is proven is a 'poor me' approach ? Are you serious ? Trying to restore some semblance of normality to your roller coaster mentality isn't a 'poor me' approach.I'm just trying to keep you on track. You spin out of control far too often. You should at least switch your arrogance off until you have earned the right to use it.
''Trying to pass it off to some mystery VIPs is senseless, just more pointless lies for the sake of it.''
I've presented a list of reasons that that particular hypothesis bears scrutiny.You call it senseless without addressing the list.It's up there with your name calling and your 'it's just obvious' approach.You can call it senseless.Your opinion means little or nothing to detached and objective readers. Your alternative to the 'senseless' is a plain and simple guess based on other cases you've read about or seen on TV and the complete absence of any evidence and an official dismissal of it from the two police forces. But other theories are 'senseless'..right, ok..
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 March 2019 at 16:56
Delete''..you can't just make things up. I'm guessing you have only recently learned the difference between fact and fiction..''
Your favourite : projection. Dear oh dear....
Observe....
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 March 2019 at 12:17
''As for irrational hatred of two strangers. I don't hate Gerry and Kate, I don't know them''
followed by :
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 March 2019 at 13:38
''As for my 'hatred' being palpable and I know nothing about them [the McCanns]'. Unfortunately I know way too much about them. ''
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 March 2019 at 16:56
''You recognizes a lie when you see one. Seriously?''
See above. . .
You lie so naturally. I'm not sure you even recognise the difference between a lie and the truth any more.As long as they are available to you on the spot when you need to start a rumour or promote some weird agenda, they'll do. I put it to you that you are little more than a perfidious little upstart .
Anonymous 5 March 2019 at 17:41
DeleteMorning, Marquise
Surely you couldn’t have missed the salient point.
Question: “Do you think we'll ever know what happened there?”
Answer (?): "I've got to know her parents over the years. And when you see parents having to get up every day..."
The Count of Monty Full.
Marquis
DeleteWhilst encouraged by your patronage, I shall remain partial to tea.
Sunday, Bloody Sunday. A disastrous weekend, just as you’d wished! I left no witnesses, you did.. Jürgen obviously misinterpreted your thoughts. No toffee on the tracks. Shame. All I can think of to ease your pain is to suggest that you have me tomorrow morning before your porridge if you think this would help. Quite a sacrifice!
Why whisper what you wish I wear when what you want is Winns Winnsself (in response to your jazzy “btw wtp”).
My ex-chauffeur, bastard, is actually French pretending to be Welsh. Thank you for letting me know he is in your safe hands. Turning your back on him may be dangerous..
Count of Monty Full.
Montague, you old scoundrel...
DeleteJurgen has received my thoughts. I've told him he is a let down of incalculable proportions. He has let Germany down as well as me.He is on a final warning and his D-day will be in Munich forthwith.Should he fail me-and indeed us- then it's all over for him.Just as it was all over on Sunday, bloody Sunday for your french poseur. How dare he pretend to be Welsh.He was sacrificed on the toffee-free tracks of my manor. Somebody had to be. I don't lose well.His last words were 'tell winsome I stole his garters'.And then he was gone.He will come no more forever, me ol' china..
Incidentally,my carnivoran comrade, the Gamble geezer....
I wouldn't say his remark was exactly a throwaway one, but nor would I say it had any real significance hinting at something occult( to coin an Amaralism ). This thing has been crafted too carefully for too long for the editors final cut to miss a give away..I suggest he was trying-albeit awkwardly- to make a statement about courage..
Ros
ReplyDeleteA simple example that shows establishment support did not stop in August 2007.
This was written on 10 Downing Street notepaper but I am sure you will tell me it is a forgery.
Here is the full text of David Cameron's letter to Kate and Gerry McCann, dated May 12, 2011.
Dear Kate and Gerry,
Thank you for your heartfelt and moving letter. Your ordeal is every parent's worst nightmare and my heart goes out to you both. I simply cannot imagine the pain you must have experienced over these four agonising years, and the strength and determination you have both shown throughout is remarkable.
I am acutely aware of the frustration you must feel as more time goes by and yet no news is forthcoming. We discussed this when we met, but I realise that a further eighteen months have gone by since then. That you have been so courageous over all this time, and have not given up, speaks volumes.
I have asked the Home Secretary to look into what more the Government could do to help Madeleine. She will be writing to you today, setting out new action involving the Metropolitan Police Service which we hope will help boost efforts in the search for Madeleine. I sincerely hope this fresh approach will provide the investigation with the new momentum that it needs.
I know that everyone hopes and prays for a successful outcome, and our thoughts remain with you and your family. We will, of course, stay in close touch with you throughout.
Yours,
David
Hi JJ 5 Mrach 2019 at 09:56
Delete"Dear Kate and Gerry" etc etc
This would’ve been the most sophisticated ironic text since Evelyn Waugh's tribute to Winston Churchill in his foreword to one of his best-known satirical novels about the British secret service activities during World War II, if we hadn't understood that Cameron has never had any such humorous qualities.
Update to bjorns summary of the case :
DeleteDavid Cameron - liar
JJ that letter has the hands of The Sun/Rebeka Brooks all over it. It was of course in response to the heartfelt letter from Gerry and Kate published on the Sun's front page. Ie it was a huge publicity stunt to shift newspapers.
ReplyDeleteBut I'm still curious about the two private meetings with Home Secretaries. According to Clarence they were asking for meetings with Ministers, but all they were offered were 'mid level Consulates.
That letter from DC may sound friendly and sympathetic (the man's a politician) but it doesn't mean the PM and HM Government were going to pervert the course of justice for two doctors. It was a gift with a sting in it's tail, Gerry and Kate wanted a Review, not a full blown police investigation.
The Sun ? You're using the tackiest of all tacky tabloids as an important source of something ?
DeleteFeb 21, 2010
Deletehttps://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/159568/McCanns-beg-Cameron-to-help-them-find-Madeleine
"Kate and Gerry McCann have asked David Cameron to help find their daughter Madeleine after a private emotional meeting with the Tory leader.
They spent half an hour at his Westminster office explaining their frustration and disappointment with the investigations.
If Mr Cameron wins the election – expected on May 6 – the McCanns hope he would give the case a new priority and order a review of all the evidence.
Mr Cameron, 43, the father of two young children himself, expressed a desire to the couple to do anything in his power to discover what happened to Madeleine, who disappeared from a holiday flat in Praia da Luz on the Algarve on May 3, 2007.
Andy Coulson, the Tory director of communications, and Clarence Mitchell, the McCanns’spokesman who hopes to stand as a Conservative in the forthcoming election, were also present.
Last week it was disclosed that Kate and Gerry, 41-year-old doctors from Rothley, Leics, have had a private meeting with Home Secretary Alan Johnson to request a review of the evidence.
He has been notably silent on the case, seemingly preferring to sit on the fence rather than use his influence to demand a breakthrough and there are no indications he will order a review.
The McCanns’ lawyer has been given a Portuguese police file of new sightings which have not been properly investigated. She is particularly interested in information that Madeleine may have been in Spain and Italy."
Hi Ros, amazing, their lawyers will be watching the upcoming documentary for any libelous content. This is what you have been saying over the years that any views that don't fit Team McCann views of events are hounded through the courts. They seem to be more interested in their own reputations than actually finding out what really happened to Madeleine. I am not going to say that the parents are guilty as that is a job for the courts, but their actions do leave a lot of question marks.
ReplyDeleteSlander, defamation of character and libel are all against the law. Everyone has a right to defend themselves against them. Why should that be suspended just for the McCanns ? Why shouldn't they be afforded the same rights as anyone ? Because lots of internet people have imagined they're criminals but the police haven't ?
ReplyDeleteHello John good to see you :)
ReplyDeleteI was just thinking about you the other day. My actual thoughts were 'I wonder if John has been swept away to Vegas by some nubile young hussy?' or whatever it is newly single men get up to. Well if you were, it is good to see you are back safely and haven't succumbed to a life of excess and debauchery. I jest of course, probably because I have on my own wish list, a weekend of excess and debauchery in New Orleans with Jack Nicholson :)
To be fair to Gerry and Kate, they are in a terrible predicament with regard to the Netflix film, it is something they have no control over. It is a very dodgy situation actually, even I am not comfortable with it. Netflix has a massive world wide audience, and real people and real families are involved.
But, on the plus side, for all those who believe Operation Grange is a cover up, the Netflix production will keep the Madeleine case in the public eye, making a cover up much less likely.
''But, on the plus side, for all those who believe Operation Grange is a cover up, the Netflix production will keep the Madeleine case in the public eye, making a cover up much less likely.'
DeleteYou really do struggle separating TV and Movies from actual reality, don't you. No wonder you can't see the weakness in all of your arguments. You think fiction is reality and reality is fiction. Not the most promising set of credentials for a would-be sleuth is it.
Tell me this : How is the production of a movie about what happened in PDL in 2007 evidence that OG isn't a cover up from 2011 to 2019 and counting ? Because they keep telling us different but not demonstrating it ? Or have you found an elusive link that proves some movie is proof of a real case review.
I'm not making any assumptions as to what is in the Netflix production - is it a movie is it a documentary, or a combination of the two. We don't know.
DeleteNetflix probably has the biggest audience in the world, anything they produce will get tens of millions of viewers worldwide. It will put Madeleine's name and her disappearance back into the public spotlight. From an awareness perspective, it is bigger than anything that Gerry and Kate could have hoped for.
Cover ups can only work if very few people know about them. If the Netflix audience are left suspecting the parents, all eyes will be on Operation Grange. Is it likely that OG would cover up the death of a child with the world watching?
Do you know that your patronising and your sarcasm reflects on you not me. I have never said a movie is proof of a real case review, that has come directly from your own head. I think you have allowed your internal dialogue to run away with itself.
Do Operation KEEP telling us different? The only two quotes you have are years old. Operation Grange haven't said very much at all, but you keep filling in the gaps with wishful thinking.
Movie, documentary, comedy, cartoon - what difference does it make ?There hasn't been a single development in the case in 12 years. Any that turn up on netflix will be part of a TV/ Film production, not the investigation. You've talked about how global this has been for 12 years. It doesn't need anything more than that. In fact, any new awareness raising exercise now would be harder as the little three year old face is now almost 16.
Delete''Cover ups can only work if very few people know about them''
That fits the case.
''Is it likely that OG would cover up the death of a child with the world watching?''
I don't think they have. I believe it was covered up a few years before they were dreamed up. They're looking at nothing.
There's nothing to see.
''Do you know that your patronising and your sarcasm reflects on you not me.''
Yes. But do you know the kind of nonsense that draws sarcasm and cynicism from people ?
'' I think you have allowed your internal dialogue to run away with itself. ''
You mean you don't understand what I said ( again). Concentrate on your own internal dialogue.
''Do Operation KEEP telling us different? The only two quotes you have are years old. Operation Grange haven't said very much at all, but you keep filling in the gaps with wishful thinking.''
I say one thing. OG have done and are doing nothing. The requests for funding is to make it appear real. I haven't expressed a single wish. But to give you something to chew on, I will. I wish they'd do a job.
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 March 2019 at 17:15
Delete"Netflix probably has the biggest audience in the world"
Wrong - but there again most of your statements are just wild guesses.
Its the biggest audience in the world watching a film about the crime of the century. Ros wouldn't exaggerate. Ever. Would she ? :/
Delete"We discussed this when we met, but I realise that a further eighteen months have gone by since then".
ReplyDeleteThis is a letter from Cameron confirming he met the McCanns in early 2010.
You state establishment support stopped around Aug 2007.
Are you seriously claiming Cameron is a liar he never met the Mccanns and Brookes wrote this letter.
As I said, I knew you would say its a forgery.
You claim that you are an expert on the McCann case, then you will know of the McCann's private meeting with the Alan Johnson, Home Secretary, in 2010. You will know of their private meeting with Home Secretary Theresa May in August 2010.Both well documented.
Nobody can produce any verifible evidence against the McCanns,but there is loads of evidence of criminality against senior UK police officers but rest assured they will not investigate themselves.
It is your blog, your rules but it is wrong to ask for cites when you don't provide them yourself.
Feb 21, 2010
Deletehttps://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/159568/McCanns-beg-Cameron-to-help-them-find-Madeleine
This blog has been receiving some very sniping comments lately, and by the way they pop up one would think you're on some kind of watch list. What's been said on this site recently that upsets people so much, could it be the mentioning of a hidden body and the flat out refusal to believe Madeleine is still alive?
ReplyDeleteYou expect a specific answer to such a vague question ? please rephrase the question and use question marks and full stops.
DeleteDon't leave spaces before using question marks either, it's a dead giveaway.
DeleteI agree @ 21:50 And no capital commas either
Delete20:32
DeleteStart every new sentence with a capital letter. It tells you when the sentence begins.
Excellent and wise counsel.I feel like saying something in brackets.
Delete"This blog has been receiving some very sniping comments lately, and by the way they pop up one would think you're on some kind of watch list. What's been said on this site recently that upsets people so much, could it be the mentioning of a hidden body and the flat out refusal to believe Madeleine is still alive?"
ReplyDeleteI can't speak for everyone but my impression is that the 'snipers' are here because they wish to defend the right of innocence unless proven guilty. And you can only be found guilty if there is evidence to prove that guilt - unless, of course, you're in a country that turns a blind eye to beating confessions out of people.
18:40
DeleteInside Castlereagh: 'We got confessions by torture'
https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2010/oct/11/inside-castlereagh-confessions-torture
"...a number of former RUC interrogators, men who worked at Castlereagh during the 70s, 80s and 90s, have recently told the Guardian that the beatings, the sleep deprivation and the other tortures were systematic, and were, at times, sanctioned at a very high level within the force."
@ Anonymous5 March 2019 at 18:40
DeleteGood call :)
Jim Gamble was with the mainly protestant RUC intelligence service, working out of Castlereagh at that time. Not only were the RUC then obtaining confessions by beatings/torture of PIRA operators, but also they obtained INTEL by bugging the Kincoran boys childrens home. The abuse/orgies with boys were used to turn by blackmail both civil servants, judiciary, but also terrorist. These were mainly protestants. This was a dirty war that has continued to the present day.
DeleteSo why is ex-RUC Jim Gamble so supportive of Catholic Gerry? He really shouldn't be,from a sectarian ideology basis; they executed his colleagues. The Catholic PIRA / INLA were handled by the Brits; that was MI5 and the DET, but yes, all out of Castlereagh.
Interesting post.I wonder what Ros makes of that. She thinks the tales of child abuse committed by civil servants and the elite are all unfounded ( as long the McCann case remains unsolved I suspect).
DeleteI think the religious angles have been over discussed in this case. From the priest of PDL, the Chapel there, the borrowed Bible and it's underlined passages and now the Irish. I don't think Gamble is protecting Gerry or Kate on religious grounds. As hypocritical religion is-especially Catholicism - this is still the case of a missing child who was either abducted or killed.
@09:54
DeleteAlso:
https://villagemagazine.ie/index.php/2017/10/not-just-ted-heath-british-establishment-paedophilia-and-its-links-to-ireland/
Winns
I believe that Ros has previously received a warning from Gamble for posting comments indicating that he was linked to some sort of illegal activity in NI.
DeleteGood grief @ freedom of speech going a bit mad
DeleteI'm sure Mr. Gamble would very much like to shut down my blog and put me in the dock, but unfortunately for him there is nothing illegal about it. I was disappointed not to get a mention in the Summers and Swan book or even the Martin Brunt report, despite the fact that I knew my blog made up over 100 pages of the notorious 'dossier'. For a long time I was public enemy number 1 with the supporters of the McCanns on the Myths sites and JATYK2 where they collected everything I wrote on social media, within minutes, then they would attack it in a feeding frenzy, file it in the dossier and discuss ways in which they could use it to wreck my life. But I take that as a plus now. As much as these people would like to label me an internet troll they can't, I'm not hiding! And I've never been stupid enough to libel anyone, as a published author I know exactly what I can or can't say from a legal perspective. As a talented writer I can say what I want without putting myself in legal jeopardy and happily most of my contributors can do this too. Such is the beauty of the English language, if you know how to use it, you can say anything you want, unbound. If the McCanns ever set their lawyers on me, I shall cite Shakespeare, Dickens, George Orwell, Picasso and Charley Chaplin. Those who would burn books are attacking the 'Arts', they are destructors, fuelled by ignorance, they should be fought on every front.
DeleteWhy did Jim Gamble go from the RUC to Child Protection. My own experience of child protection brings back harrowing memories. I know what it is like to 'seized' by child protection and placed into care of monsters. It was my first introduction into everything that is bad in this world. My heart goes out to all those kids seized by Operation Ore and in the creepy raids of those social workers who were inspired by Ray Wyre to believe Satanic sexual abuse of children was a real thing and widely practiced in the UK. How many families were destroyed by the weird and sinister imaginings of Ray Wyre?
Happily the Satanic stuff has had it's day, people are rather more sophisticated now and unlikely to believe large swathes of the British public are worshipping Satan and sacrificing their children to him. I don't know if this was after EastEnders, falling asleep on the sofa or making the kids sarnies for school the next day, but these busy families somehow found time to indulge in orgies, sexual perversion and child sacrifice. Htf did 'they' managed to sell this to the authoriti3es and the public beats me, but they did, and hundreds of kids were put in care.
@ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 March 2019 at 14:17
DeleteWhat a load of absolute drivel - you have exceeded yourself
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 March 2019 at 14:17
Delete''I'm sure Mr. Gamble would very much like to shut down my blog and put me in the dock, but unfortunately for him there is nothing illegal about it.''
The general feeling among normal and balanced observers is that all the internet has contributed to the case is nonsense and inane angry arguments that all too often culminate in accusations that can't be proven and all accuse tow parents of something horrendous.Again, without proof.It's a case of 'if i hadn't have seen / read it I wouldn't have believed it'.So this blog and the other place will never be taken down a long as they can be referenced as nutty.
'' If the McCanns ever set their lawyers on me, I shall cite Shakespeare, Dickens, George Orwell, Picasso and Charley Chaplin. Those who would burn books are attacking the 'Arts', they are destructors, fuelled by ignorance, they should be fought on every front.''
And you'd be sectioned and carried out.
''Why did Jim Gamble go from the RUC to Child Protection. My own experience of child protection brings back harrowing memories''
Are you comparing the two ? What was your job ?
''Happily the Satanic stuff has had it's day, people are rather more sophisticated now and unlikely to believe large swathes of the British public are worshipping Satan and sacrificing their children to him.''
When you have two spare minutes tell me everything you know about Satan worship.
One day you'll open your eyes and close your mouth and think. Hopefully. Whenever you're told of, or hear or read about, child abuse, paedophilia and satanic abuse you DON'T ask yourself how it compares to your own personal history.It has nothing to do with you or your life so drawing broad conclusions about things unrelated makes no sense. You basically have a 'that didn't happen in my case so everyone's lying'.Its childish.
Hi Rosalinda,
ReplyDeleteThat should be a very interesting Netflix film to add to the Madeleine disappearance story.
But maybe not so interesting after McCann lawyers have demanded cuts wherever their version of events might be threatened.
In fact it would be about the shortest movie ever to be seen if the child's mother Mrs McCann's version of events is to be believed.
Here's what the film portrays:
Two English doctors (one a brilliant and respected heart specialist, the other a practicing GP) and their three toddlers fly out for a Spring holiday to a remote off-season Portuguese resort located in southern Portugal.
They book into a holiday hotel where their family unbeknownst to them, are immediately put under surveillance by a roving gang of child kidnappers looking for just such an opportunity to steal a young blonde English child for re-sale into a neighbouring country.
The Algarve district where they operate from has a notorious reputation as a haven for criminals, pedophiles, and thieves.
Even the complex they are staying at has been burglarized several times.
You can't get more scary than that. - The family were indeed in dangerous territory.
And so it happened: they were under surveillance for several days and nights before the gang struck on the night of 3rd May 2007.
The abductors knew they only had a short window of opportunity to kidnap the child as the parents were continually returning to the apartment all through the evening to check on their children.
Luckily doors and windows were open and entry was easy. In the total darkness they had a choice of taking any or all of the three children from the bedroom, so without waking the two babies they hustled the eldest girl out of the room, - never to be seen again.
And that's what happened.
A few minutes later the mother of the missing child returned to the apartment to find whooshing curtains, an open window, and her eldest child gone.
In her desperation this woman ran out into the streets of the sleepy town screaming, "they've taken her", to anyone who would listen.
Now these parents could relax a little, they could phone around to friends, relatives, and law firms. It was too much of an effort to search for their missing child themselves, both she and her husband could leave that to strangers.
They spent the next few days jogging and playing tennis. Nothing wrong with that.
And to this day this loving couple have no idea where their daughter is...
Except she is definitely out there somewhere - very much alive.
CUT...Film ends. Credits.
jc
Well that could be one way JC. It depends what perspective they take. Let's hope they don't go down the Richard Bilton route and target poorly educated manual workers.
DeleteI've actually just watched the Amanda Knox video on Netflix. It was quite brilliantly made and gave a fair hearing to both sides. The viewer is left to make their own mind up. Perhaps that is how the Madeleine production will go?
Anonymous5 March 2019 at 19:12
Delete( jc )
''That should be a very interesting Netflix film to add to the Madeleine disappearance story...But maybe not so interesting ''
I'm glad you cleared that up. Yes, folks, we're at the 24 hr newsdesk of jc. Fasten your seatbelts...
''Here's what the film portrays:''
And to think I've accused you of only making things up to fit your bizarre agenda and wacky anti- Mccann crusade. What was I thinking. So, jc, tell us every detail of the film you, and nobody else, has seen yet...
''Two English doctors and their three toddlers fly out for a Spring holiday... unbeknownst to them, are immediately put under surveillance by a roving gang of child kidnappers looking for just such an opportunity to steal a young blonde English child ...The Algarve district where they operate from has a notorious reputation as a haven for criminals, pedophiles, and thieves...And so it happened: they were under surveillance for several days and nights before the gang struck on the night of 3rd May 2007...The abductors knew they only had a short window of opportunity to kidnap the child as the parents were continually returning to the apartment...so without waking the two babies they hustled the eldest girl out of the room, - never to be seen again....And that's what happened.''
It sounds thrilling so far, Uncle Jc....
''A few minutes later the mother of the missing child returned to the apartment to find whooshing curtains, an open window, and her eldest child gone...Now these parents could relax a little, they could phone around to friends, relatives, and law firms. It was too much of an effort to search for their missing child''
Damn them gangsters, Uncle jc.
''They spent the next few days jogging and playing tennis. Nothing wrong with that.''
I don't know about that Uncle jc- isn't jogging and playing tennis a sign of a psychotic mind ?
''And to this day this loving couple have no idea where their daughter is...Except she is definitely out there somewhere - very much alive.''
I'm filling up.Can I have a glass of milk please uncy..
'' Let's hope they don't go down the Richard Bilton route and target poorly educated manual workers. ''
DeleteOh the very thought of it Dahling. It makes one bilious does it not.
''I've actually just watched the Amanda Knox video on Netflix. It was quite brilliantly made and gave a fair hearing to both sides. The viewer is left to make their own mind up. Perhaps that is how the Madeleine production will go?''
DeleteYes, Ros. A complex 12 year old mystery about a toddler who vanished will be left to a global audience to arrive at a conclusion and solve the case through a movie. We should never have left this ti the Met in the UK or the PJ in Portugal. We should have called Universal Studios and Stephen King.
Hi Rosalinda
Deletehere're just some thoughts about the upcoming Netflix doc.
If the Netflix documentary is meant to be serious, but not speculative, just one side should be discussed and that’s the one that originates from the only publicly known and impartial side, namely the PJ investigation from 2007/08, which must’ve been the only one that Netflix and others have had access to.
The first investigation, as we all know, concludes that there must’ve been a staged abduction, but apparently not convincingly enough to the prosecutor-general. In it, there’re neither hypotheses nor evidence of an abduction, but loads of facts and statements by many witnesses and by three known and investigated suspects, one of whom (Robert Murat) was framed by the friends of the other two suspects.
No matter how one evaluates the first Portuguese investigation, it cannot be opposed to the abduction hypothesis as the latter is entirely based on the McCanns' own story and nothing else. It would be unfair to the audience, some of whom may not have read so much about the case, to present stories by the former suspects as a counterweight to real facts, which are documented in an ambitious, thorough and extensive police investigation.
Björn5 March 2019 at 23:29
Delete''If the Netflix documentary is meant to be serious, but not speculative, just one side should be discussed ''
If it's meant to be serious it won't be about 'sides' it will be about the event and the subsequent investigation.Any book, movie, or documentary that wants to jump on the McCann bandwagon can only be speculative. How else can you be after 12 blank years and no clues or evidence ? Discussing only one angle is biased.I can see how you favour that particular style of reporting.
''The first investigation, as we all know, concludes that there must’ve been a staged abduction''
We all 'know' that ? That was a conclusion ?Why did the PJ re-open the case then ? Did they have their culprits nailed ? Nice work...
'' In it, there’re neither hypotheses nor evidence of an abduction, but loads of facts and statements by many witnesses and by three known and investigated suspects, one of whom (Robert Murat) was framed by the friends of the other two suspects. ''
No hypothesis or evidence of an abduction because there were no prints or DNA left. But the child was gone ? Magic ? Amaral had Murat tailed for 24 hours due to the Murat boy's following the police around asking where the investigation was going and trying to read documents that were none of his business.That aroused suspicion for good reason.
''No matter how one evaluates the first Portuguese investigation, it cannot be opposed to the abduction hypothesis as the latter is entirely based on the McCanns' own story''
No matter how one evaluates the investigation it cannot be opposed. Yes, Bjorn, very objective.So we can evaluate in our own way as long as we agree with the theory you prefer. The parents assumed an abduction had taken place as their daughter had gone.That adds up.You want them to be found guilty of all manner of sordid crimes and you have long since left logic and balanced thinking in your own wacky wake.
'' It would be unfair to the audience, some of whom may not have read so much about the case, to present stories by the former suspects as a counterweight to real facts,''
The real facts being that the blood samples and DNA apparently found at the apartment were not sufficient to incriminate anyone.The findings of the sniffer dogs needed corroborative evidence to elevate them to incriminating evidence.But there wasn't any.That Amaral was removed just after being found guilty of perjury in another case of a missing little girl. That he alleged the parents had cremated and frozen their child then buried her-all of which have failed to receive supporting evidence. They're pretty decent facts for the 'beginners' to mull over before any fool tries to indoctrinate them into the death cult.
Hello Anon 6 March 2019 at 01:16
DeleteWhat I actually meant was that the documentary shouldn’t be about the McCanns’ supporters’ view on the case as opposed to that of their critics. Such an approach would just cause confusion and that’s what the McCanns have been striving for since the very beginning, because they know that such discussions will distract attention away from a more serious discussion based on all the documented facts in the case, nothing of which benefits them.
If there would be something in the ongoing Portuguese or in the British investigation about forensic findings or new witness statements, that might incriminate new suspects outside the tapas group, the abduction theory should of course be a natural subject of discussion, but nothing of the kind seems to have leaked from the ongoing secret investigation, so we’re left with the first one in which there isn’t the slightest indication of anything but the McCanns’ involvement.
Björn5 March 2019 at 23:29
Delete''If the Netflix documentary is meant to be serious, but not speculative, just one side should be discussed''
Bjorn : the voice of reason as ever.
Get your dates right! Gonçalo Amaral was removed from the case in October 2007 and the trial where he was found guilty took place in 2009.
DeleteCarolina
Anonymous 6 March 2019 at 12:18
DeleteGet your dates right! Gonçalo Amaral was removed from the case in October 2007 and the trial where he was found guilty took place in 2009.
Carolina
Hello, Carolina
At long last you’ve said it.
I did wonder why you didn’t ask your opponent to cite Cipriano case evidence in support of his assertions.
Respect for your pertinaciousness
6 Mar 01:16
Delete"Amaral had Murat tailed for 24 hours due to the Murat boy's following the police around asking where the investigation was going and trying to read documents that were none of his business. That aroused suspicion for good reason".
This is simply untrue.
Amaral had surveillance put on RM, due to information already given to him by UK police and CEOP.
This was before the PJ report on Murat trying to read documents and asking too many questions.
Murat was placed in the frame by the UK police within a few hours of Supt Hill of Surrey/CEOP arriving in PDL.
How he detected Murat as a suspect within a few hours, is either policing of the highest order, or a predetermined stitch up.
This is obviously being considered by OG and may account for the delay due to its "delicate nature".
Whether you believe in the McCanns or in Amaral, there is too much mixing hearsay, opinion and fact.
Fact should be your only consideration backed up by evidence not tittle-tattle
Anonymous6 March 2019 at 12:18
Delete''Get your dates right! Gonçalo Amaral was removed from the case in October 2007 and the trial where he was found guilty took place in 2009.
Carolina ''
You again.
I'll get the dates right when you get your priorities right... The two main facts to concentrate on are : the guilty verdict and the removal of him.
The crime he committed related to a case a couple of years before the McCanns went to Portugal.He was found guilty of falsifying evidence in the case of a missing, later pronounced dead, little girl.He just can't be trusted with pen and paper can he ? Shame the much- respected supreme court didn't come forward as an expert witness and said he was merely making the files into a work of literary nature and exercising his right to free speech.Win some, lose some.
During the time between his crime and the verdict, the McCann case happened and so did his crusade against them. His bosses must have known he was on a loser in court and, as he was basically accusing the McCanns of more or less replicating the actions of the culprits killed the little girl in 2004.He was famous through the McCann case and his allegations.It was better they took him out of the press spotlight.Who would want the investigation into their missing child co-ordinated by a detective who was a convicted felon found guilty of editing the files in a case of a missing child ?
Björn6 March 2019 at 11:41
Delete''What I actually meant was that the documentary shouldn’t be about the McCanns’ supporters’ view on the case as opposed to that of their critics.''
And what i explained is that this is a criminal investigation. The McCann supporters and the Antis are not important at all.They weren't invited to the party, they just gatecrashed and tried to be part of it with their opinions and silly arguments. The more fanatical and unbalanced have made it far more than a hobby to the point that it's personal to them. I suppose that's the danger of the cocktail we end up with when we mix the internet with solitude and boredom.
''If there would be something in the ongoing Portuguese or in the British investigation about forensic findings...''
Then we would have heard wouldn't we. You think it's been kept back until someone decided to make a film ?OG would jump at the chance to let us know there are new witnesses / statements / etc so they don't have to feel embarrassed by their apparent apathy or incompetence.They could hold their heads up and justify their cap-in-hand- requests for whatever it is they're doing.
'' so we’re left with the first one in which there isn’t the slightest indication of anything but the McCanns’ involvement. ''
That's utter shite, with respect. Don't speak for 'we'. Speak for you.And of course, back your opinions up with something worth reading.
To 14:18
DeleteI can do without your obnoxious "you again"!
You are deliberately lying or being obtuse when you state that Gonçalo Amaral falsified evidence in the case of Joana's disappearance. The conviction had to do with the alleged beating of Leonor and his statement to the police about the incident in the Faro PJ headquarters. Leonor Cipriano had already been convicted and sentenced to 20 years in prison in 2005, 4 years before the trial against the PJ officers who were acquitted of the charges of beating her up. Only GA and another officer were convicted on lesser charges And no one could understand why since the other officers were acquitted.
If you are going to continue with your arrogant posts I suggest that you get your facts straight at least.
Caroline
JJ6 March 2019 at 14:16
Delete6 Mar 01:16
''Fact should be your only consideration backed up by evidence not tittle-tattle''
That's fair enough, and i agree.
''Amaral had surveillance put on RM, due to information already given to him by UK police and CEOP....This was before the PJ report on Murat trying to read documents and asking too many questions.''
What was the information given to him ? if he had received damning intelligence on Murat that early, how do we make sense of Amaral and Co then allowing him close enough to the documents as a translator ? A possible suspect as a translator ?It seems, chronologically, that his interest in the documents and his questioning of the police regarding the direction of the investigation was the proverbial 'last straw' that prompted the tail put on him .That's if the PJ report is honest. It seems that it was honest enough.
''How he detected Murat as a suspect within a few hours, is either policing of the highest order, or a predetermined stitch up.''
Good question.I'd like to think it was policing of the highest order, but this is the McCann case so I can't think it.If it was a pre-determined stitch up, they would have had to act extremely early in the piece. At a stage before the PJ had a chance to begin much at all.That smacks of a cover up at any cost to frame a patsy so quick.Considering how high profile Murat is in the show, so little has been told about him and his history. Just bits and pieces of his odd relationship history and online 'interests' he shared with his girlfriend and her husband and a Russian computer buff. Everything else is vague.Protection ? I'd bet on that horse...
''Whether you believe in the McCanns or in Amaral, there is too much mixing hearsay, opinion and fact. ''
True.So much that can 'speak' to us from a crime scene was seemingly silenced on day one.Nothing has changed. So all that's left is space to fill with speculation.And that's all we have if we're honest. All we can do is question. Not that answers are likely to ever emerge.The lid wasn't just slammed tight on this case years ago, it was welded.
Anonymous6 March 2019 at 13:55
Delete''I did wonder why you didn’t ask your opponent to cite Cipriano case evidence in support of his assertions.
Respect for your pertinaciousness''
Coming round here with your university words, big city ways and red fishnets...you're cheering the wrong horses on again Winston old thing...dates again ? The case year ? The arrests year ? The guilty verdict year ? The year of the McCann investigation beginning ?
''Anonymous6 March 2019 at 17:48
DeleteTo 14:18
''I can do without your obnoxious "you again"!
You are deliberately lying or being obtuse when you state that Gonçalo Amaral falsified evidence in the case of Joana's disappearance.''
Calm down. Take a tablet or something. ..
OK, what was he given an 18 month suspended jail sentence for ?
''The conviction had to do with the alleged beating of Leonor and his statement to the police about the incident in the Faro PJ headquarters.''
Yes. And your point ? I said he had been convicted of falsifying evidence regarding that case.Lying, in other words. I didn't say he had anything to do with beating a confession out of anyone.All I said was that he lied and did so on paper.
''Only GA and another officer were convicted on lesser charges And no one could understand why since the other officers were acquitted.''
The other officers were acquitted of assault and obtaining a confession using undue and illegal force. Amaral wasn't cleared of lying. Two separate charges / incidents.
''If you are going to continue with your arrogant posts I suggest that you get your facts straight at least.''
I always do. If you don't agree with them or don't understand them, it's not my fault is it my angry little teapot..
You stated that "he was found guilty of falsifying evidence in the case of a missing, later pronounced dead, little girl" and "found guilty of editing the files in the case of a missing child". This is a deliberate falsehood and you know it. If you refuse to understand what he was convicted of that is your problem.
DeleteThe PJ officers who were on trial did not obtain any confession from Leonor Cipriano, she and her brother had already confessed in the presence of their lawyers. The officers were brought in from Lisbon to try to convince them to tell them where the body was.
There were not two separate incidents, the charges were brought against all the officers because of what happened in the PJ headquarters in Faro.
It is difficult to agree with or understand posts that are deliberate misrepresentations. Also you still refuse to understand that it was not Gonçalo Amaral who influenced the course of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine.
BTW I am not your angry little teapot nor do I need to take any tablets. You do not debate as you profess, you insult and mock anyone who shows up the flaws in your arguments. In short you are a troll.
Anonymous 6 March 2019 at 19:00
DeleteIs that you, Owl?
“Coming round here with your university words … and red fishnets...”
Those words are Christopher’s as are the fishnets, you know that. I have no interest in horses, honey is my thing, and you know that too.
What are all those question marks, dear?
Pooh
Anonymous 6 March 2019 at 23:19
DeleteThank you for your post. I’m very interested in what you’ve said.
W-t-Pooh
Teapot....
DeleteAmaral received an 18 month suspended jail sentence and didn't think, or his legal team didn't,that he had grounds to appeal it. Why would that be ?
I know that the confession had already happened and commented on it in a previous thread. I commented on how silly it made Amaral look as the confession was already in the bag and no dishonesty was needed.
I also suggested in the previous thread that the guilty parties had tried to come across as victims in order that charges could be dropped and compensation could be claimed but were never going to get away with it and they didn't. The bruised face was ridiculous.As if officers would leave such visible marks.
There were two separate charges.Amaral only stood charged of perjury and he was g=found guilty.If you don't like that or refuse to accept it, don't nag me, take it up with the courts.
''It is difficult to agree with or understand posts that are deliberate misrepresentations. Also you still refuse to understand that it was not Gonçalo Amaral who influenced the course of the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine.
All I've stated are facts.I haven't lied or tried to misrepresent anyone.I never said Amaral 'influenced' the course of the investigation, i said he was originally the co-ordinator but was removed by his superiors. Again, facts.
This is what happens when your view of things become so narrow. You can't see anything around you or around your chosen view.
''BTW I am not your angry little teapot nor do I need to take any tablets. You do not debate as you profess, you insult and mock anyone who shows up the flaws in your arguments. In short you are a troll.''
That's a childish attitude and inaccurate observation ( again). I discuss any flaws that are pointed out in my arguments and discuss them and reply to questions.The evidence is seen wherever and whatever i post here. You have your reasons for refusing to acknowledge that though don't you ? My posts argue for me if you look closer. If I mock anyone who tries to offend , belittle or insult me, i make no apologies. I'm trying to teach them some manners.As i've said before, if you can't take a punch don't start a fight.
'What are all those question marks, dear?
DeletePooh''
Dubya..has Christopher driven you quite mad ? they were points i wanted you to consider on their own and then as a sequence.Good grief.
@13:45
DeleteComrade Zee
Bear in mind that this bear has little brain. Could you please cite the source/s you rely on in this instance..
Namaste.
Pooh
OMG btw wtp.....
DeleteThe events need only be googled for the dates and chronology to appear. Stop being such a sloth... we don't take kindly to folks who don't google round these parts..
5 March 2019 14.31. You're obviously completely unaware of how patronising you sound in your never ending posts. I thoroughly enjoy reading Ros's blogs. Don't always agree with them, but I enjoy her writing style. I will continue to read them but I won't be reading or participating in the comments. You seem to enjoy debate, good for you. I personally find the verbal volleyball off putting. Never hear you mention Madeline, remember her. I won't be answering what will predictably be a withering reply. Also, not everyone can get their heads round this heavy debating. Oh well, plod on, thank God it's my choice not to read it. Sorry Ros, I haven't got your way with words to keep up
ReplyDeleteSo you want to read a lot here but not a discussion or debate. So basically you just want to read everything Ros says about the McCanns. She doesn't say much about Madeleine either. Probably less than anyone else to be truthful, such is her passion for hating the child's parents.
Delete''You're obviously completely unaware of how patronising you sound in your never ending posts''
DeleteHow bright of you to have picked up on that. Well done...
If you don't read, you don't learn by the way. If 5 minutes reading feels 'endless' to you then I'm afraid it isn't the length of the posts that troubles you. it's the length of your attention span, old fruit.
I don't want to clog up your website too much Rosalinda, but I feel I must reply to the one I call "Ebeneezer" the poster with all the attributes of the famous Charles Dickens Christmas Carol character Ebeneezer Scrooge. (sometimes he's Gary, but mostly it's anonymous).
ReplyDeleteAnyway like Scrooge his namesake the miser, when Ebeneezer is confronted by reality on this blog his typical response is to utter in so many words the famous phrase: "Bah Humbug".
But no matter, there could be a happy ending to his situation.
Just like in the story. It's not too late for this character to have a change of heart and thus avoid traveling wrapped in chains like a ghost through eternity as happened to Scrooge's miserly business partner Jacob Marley
Anyway, all in all this is not a bad thing - to have a mystery person @21:57 dissecting people's previous posts sentence by sentence even if he can supply no input himself.
The outcome being your readers are so lucky to be able to read their comments all over again.
Thank you Ebeneezer. What else can you say...
Have a nice day.
jc
Anonymous6 March 2019 at 03:14
Delete''I don't want to clog up your website too much Rosalinda, but I feel I must reply to the one I call "Ebeneezer" the poster with all the attributes of the famous Charles Dickens Christmas Carol character Ebeneezer Scrooge. (sometimes he's Gary, but mostly it's anonymous).''
Thanks for over -explaining your witticism, jc.For the record, I'm always anonymous( ziggy) but never Gary.You must have imagined that, then believed it to be true because all you imagine is.
''Anyway like Scrooge his namesake the miser, when Ebeneezer is confronted by reality on this blog his typical response is to utter in so many words the famous phrase: "Bah Humbug".
Oh my ribs. Can you pull a quote of 'bah humbug' from anywhere on the blog ?
''But no matter, there could be a happy ending to his situation. ''
I have a situation ?
''Just like in the story. It's not too late for this character to have a change of heart ...avoid traveling wrapped in chains like a ghost through eternity..''
What a great literary allusion.I think with my mind, not my heart.That's why I make sense :)
''Anyway, all in all this is not a bad thing - to have a mystery person @21:57 dissecting people's previous posts sentence by sentence even if he can supply no input himself. ''
I question nonsense or lies.My input is all over the blog.If I'm asked to explain my thoughts I do.Do you-ever ?
''Thank you Ebeneezer. What else can you say...''
You messed up the much-anticipated punch line. It was supposed to be ''what else can I say'' wasn't it..You do get confused don't you, Mr Dickens..
Anonymous6 March 2019 at 03:14
DeleteJc. maybe your next netflix block buster could be a new, lavish production of A Christmas Carol.You can fund it with the box office takings from the McCann documentary you made recently. '' Gawd bless us every one ''
5 March 2019 at 22.28 said I wouldn't comment, but I am doing. IMO your posts/replies lack warmth and humour. A good blogger, poster, replier acknowledges another's points, even, occasionally admit they may be wrong. I would suggest it's you who hasn't read the PJ files, Kates's book, Gerrys blogs, watched their interviews. Anyone who has, no matter what your viewpoint, even the most staunch supporter has to admit there are discrepancies, inconsistencies and even lies. If a dog alerted in my holiday apartment I would be begging the police to find out why, I wouldn't go on the defensive and dismiss them. I have no doubt you're a person who loves a good debate, a good argument, that's great but give and take is good too. As I said in my previous post I do enjoy reading Ros's posts, she's honest and replies with kindness and humour. I don't agree with everything she says though. That's it old fruit!
ReplyDeleteAnonymous 6 March 2019 at 07:21
DeleteThank you very much for your comment.
“IMO your posts/replies lack warmth and humour.”
I would disagree with that.
“A good blogger, poster, replier acknowledges another's points, even, occasionally admit they may be wrong.”
I find that the poster you are talking about does that.
“…there are discrepancies, inconsistencies and even lies.”
Absolutely. Discrepancies and inconsistencies are aplenty.
“If a dog alerted in my holiday apartment I would be begging the police to find out why, I wouldn't go on the defensive and dismiss them.”
That’s an important point.
“I have no doubt you're a person who loves a good debate, a good argument, that's great….”
I agree.
“…she's honest and replies with kindness and humour…”
I agree.
“I don't agree with everything she says though.”
With no disrespect to Rosalinda, neither do I.
Good wishes and thank you once again.
Winnie-the-Pooh
Great..now there's an echo..
DeleteYes, Echo.
Delete'cho...cho....cho...
Delete''5 March 2019 at 22.28 said I wouldn't comment, but I am doing. IMO your posts/replies lack warmth and humour.''
ReplyDeleteThey don't lack intelligent discussion.Maybe you need facebook if you want to be made to feel warm and have a laugh about subjects like missing children.
'' A good blogger, poster, replier acknowledges another's points, ''
I do that more than anyone who contributes to this blog, including our host.You're lying for some reason.A good blogger will discuss what's been blogged, not try to analyse the poster of the content with a view to try and criticise him or her. That's using something as an excuse to unload a demon or three. Is that your thing, old sport ?
''I would suggest it's you who hasn't read the PJ files, Kates's book, Gerrys blogs, watched their interviews''
I know what's in the files. Can you find anyone who contributes to this blog who requests proof and evidence than I do ? Show me. Books and blogs are books and blogs. I've studied the facts of the case. The event itself and what followed. If i ever need to see opinions on blogs or in books i'll consult them.But the conclusions you arrive at based on books of opinions can only be opinions.That's not bad in itself, but claiming them to be facts is silly.
'' even the most staunch supporter has to admit there are discrepancies, inconsistencies and even lies. If a dog alerted in my holiday apartment I would be begging the police to find out why, ''
And if the detective co-ordinating the investigation decided it wasn't merely alerting to a death or blood but your guilt, you'd demand to see the proof. I'm a staunch supporter of the truth, not the opinions of bored nutcases with a browser. Mark Grime was in charge of the dogs. He's the expert.What did he say ? Maybe you need to give him the benefit of your wisdom and experience. I don't need it, thanks.
'' I wouldn't go on the defensive and dismiss them.''
I don't think he was on the defensive.
''I have no doubt you're a person who loves a good debate, a good argument, that's great but give and take is good too''
I do enjoy debate, yes.I also appreciate the need to give and take. If you read all or most of what I've posted on this blog you'd see that.Note how much i give, how much i add to a debate and how much i take. I always explain what I've said if asked. I rarely get the same in return. You're telling the only contributor that you shouldn't.
''As I said in my previous post I do enjoy reading Ros's posts, she's honest and replies with kindness and humour.''
That's your opinion. She often tells us things that aren't facts but claims that they are.Or she'll be untruthful ( see above on this very thread) and her good humour is selective.If you share her hatred of the two parents lost their child then it's OK to have some fun with her.If you don't, forget it.Kindness ? Do you drink ? If so, slow down before you engage your thoughts and convert them into words.
''. I don't agree with everything she says though. That's it old fruit!''
So now we all know what you like, who you like and what annoys you. Do you feel better, old son ? Maybe one day you'll actually contribute something to do with the McCann case.After all, as a long time reader and admirer of the blog, you'll know that it's online to discuss just that.It's not just a place to log onto to, whine and get things out of your system.There's counselors for that.Or pubs and barmaids.
Martin Grime. Mark Harrison
DeleteNamaste.
Winns
My bad
DeleteSawdust Ziggy
“…there are discrepancies, inconsistencies and even lies.”
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely. Discrepancies and inconsistencies are aplenty.
An accusation and an agreement but no actual 'lies' identified.That leaves just the criticism standing on it's own. Out your heads together and show me my lies.
“Anonymous 6 March 2019 at 12:14
Delete“…there are discrepancies, inconsistencies and even lies.”
Absolutely. Discrepancies and inconsistencies are aplenty.
An accusation and an agreement but no actual 'lies' identified.That leaves just the criticism standing on it's own. Out your heads together and show me my lies.”
I’ve mentioned no ‘lies’ ( Me: “Absolutely. Discrepancies and inconsistencies are aplenty.”)
To put the sentence “…there are discrepancies, inconsistencies and even lies.” in its context: “I would suggest it's you who hasn't read the PJ files, Kates's book, Gerrys blogs, watched their interviews. Anyone who has, no matter what your viewpoint, even the most staunch supporter has to admit there are discrepancies, inconsistencies and even lies.”
Namaste.
Winnie-the-Pooh
Anonymous 6 March 2019. Sukhino Bhava.
DeleteWhat's that.Is it addressed to everyone anonymous on 6 March ?
Deleteshammanee-dak-dak
DeleteSanskrit and something else perhaps?
DeleteW-t-P
a heady blend of Klingon and Esperanto , comrade, if I'm not mistaken..
Delete6 March 11.46. I'm not your old son. I'm a she, a grandma and have no need for pubs, barmaids or a counsellor. Any way bye bye, nice to have met you
ReplyDeletePlease accept my apologies old gal :) x
Delete6 March 2019 18.17. Now that was humorous, well done. X
Delete* Out = Put. :)
ReplyDeleteHey Anonymous at 11:59.
ReplyDeleteAt least the readers here have from you a solid admission that you are indeed the mysterious Ziggy we all suspected. Not Gary, or anybody else.
As a subliminal stab: that someone on this blog might call you Ebeneezer is probably as close as it gets - with all the Z's involved.
But let's give that one a pass.
A question that must be festering in the minds of readers of this website, is: Are you writing as either Mr or Mrs Gerald McCann or are you playing Devil's Advocate to satisfy mysterious inner urges?
It's certain that people like you with all sorts of free time on their hands will be able to give this question their very best thoughts.
I look forward to your reply.
jc
Anonymous7 March 2019 at 02:01
Delete''At least the readers here have from you a solid admission that you are indeed the mysterious Ziggy we all suspected. Not Gary, or anybody else.''
'The mysterious ziggy' ( cue dramatic music).There's nothing mysterious about me, old boy. I'm just your common or garden genius with a flair for the unsolved and a talent for cogitation.You must be the only regular reader who didn't know me. Ros certainly does. She even addresses me as ziggy.That and, darling ( it's implied).
''As a subliminal stab: that someone on this blog might call you Ebeneezer is probably as close as it gets - with all the Z's involved.''
One.
''But let's give that one a pass.''
Too kind.
''A question that must be festering in the minds of readers of this website, is: Are you writing as either Mr or Mrs Gerald McCann or are you playing Devil's Advocate to satisfy mysterious inner urges?''
More mystery ? This time 'urges' ?I have to say, old sport, even putting your strange paranoia to one side, you seem as mad as a bag of spiders. I'm writing as 'anonymous' because i can't be bothered signing Ziggy.I have no inner urges.Well, none that are present when I'm at a keyboard. They're not particularly 'mysterious' either.Thankfully, they're healthy and normal and easily controllable.I'm known for my self control.I'm sorry if my thoughts have caused a festering in your mind or in the mind of anyone else here.How are your urges today. jc. Yours are far harder to control and not exactly pleasant to witness.But you seem reasonably calm today which is a welcome relief to us all...
''It's certain that people like you with all sorts of free time on their hands will be able to give this question their very best thoughts.''
People like me ? There aren't any people like me, old sport.
''I look forward to your reply.''
My pleasure.
Anonymous 7 March 2019 at 11:59
DeleteYou are doing better than the Liverpoolies last Sunday. Sorry, I know it’s been hurting.
Thank you for severing the French Connection.
“People like me ? There aren't any people like me...”
You are a gift, a grief, a gift, a possible final grief.
Like the Chinese nests whose diminishing answers suggest infinite loss.
I’d like a word. Please be in C Robin’s Red Room in half an hour.
Helen
Helen you old slapper ...i thought you were still in Holloway.
DeleteI'll be there. Shall I bring a bottle ? Champagne ? Or just a jar of pickled quail eggs ( see..i bet you thought I'd forgot). By the way, I love the new look. I always said teeth would suit you.When are you getting the rest ? That dazzling bar code of a smile is powerful juju. I hear you had something filthy going on with a french chauffeur. What became of that- or need i ask..
Half an hour.Wear your cap sleeved pinafore. The indigo one.
Anonymous 7 March 2019 at 14:37
DeleteYou still are a pisspot of refulgent charm, Zee m’ dear, no denying.
Holloway made me persona non grata for the foreseeable future. Couldn’t stand my scent.
The teeth…the few of your and the few of mine should make a full house, provided you’ve been brushing yours well. We’ll let our jujus have fun together, won’t we, dear…
Pickled quail eggs… I haven’t forgotten that night in Venice: you feeding me eggs while bruising my ankle with you cleats. No, thanks. Champagne… I’ll have a drop.
For once, I’d love to see you wear your Brazil shirt, dear, to match my indigo whastit. Please no cleats this time.
You need not ask: the lady is not for discussing filthy rumours in public.
Get ready, love.
H
alas some of my posts are not seeing the light of day, comrade..lets pretend its a coincidence..im sure there's a deep reason..after all, it would be censorship otherwise. And that's like book burning.Imagine such a thing..
DeleteI think the netflix nonsense could be a sign that the end is near.Not because Netflix is the oracle, but because it's a another money monster in the Land of tack.After 12 years of hearing, reading and listening to the same things the boredom has begun to see the crowd slowly walk away.It may well have been an exercise in excitable chitter -chat online for thousands of would be detectives and it may well have served yet more people desperate for their 15 minutes of fame via the web.But all of that has done nothing for the case and gone nowhere but in circles. Deja Vu has become slightly mind-numbing. After twelve years people are talking about the same thing now as in 2007.Consequently the case is littered with tropes.Netflix want to get their slice before the audience drift off to the next trend.
ReplyDeleteI said elsewhere that i don't see how the hype and excitement that heralded the announcement of this venture was being generated.After all, if two country's police forces and a separate 'review' hasn't found anything new or any genuine developments, what could a movie do ?Or, to be more precise, what could yet another documentary do ? Have slicker actors for dramatic reconstructions and melodramatic loud music for effect ? Probably. But the bottom line is that it's just the story we all know being retold with slicker lighting.What can they show us of Madeleine ? She'd be almost 16 years old when this thing is aired.She was almost 4 when it happened. At least the posters were genuinely accurate should we all look around to see her.Yes they could re-introduce the age progression guess. Without knowing if her hairs long, short, blonde or dyed. If she's slim or overweight.Pointless really. It's just sensationalism. And there's 8 weeks of it. It's a feeding frenzy for the online obsessives;eight weeks of 'catch up' after every episode. Every line re-analysed. Every statement argued over( again).Can anyone really blame the parents for keeping away from it ?
''According to reports, the eight-part series will explore Madeleine's case and include interviews with key figures and investigators...
Kate and Gerry McCann have now said they chose not to participate in the documentary despite being asked to take part my the film makers.
In a statement, her parents said:
"We are aware that Netflix are planning to screen a documentary in March 2019 about Madeleine's disappearance.The production company told us that they were making the documentary and asked us to participate.''
"We did not see - and still do not see - how this programme will help the search for Madeleine and, particularly given there is an active police investigation, it could potentially hinder it''.
But it will keep a lot of people in the spotlight and give even more a chance to repeat the same old same old..
anon at 05;43
Delete."But all of that has done nothing for the case and gone nowhere but in circles. Deja Vu has become slightly mind-numbing"
..............................
Even the HO or officers from grange are of the same opinion with a now supposed annual asking of funds rather than the biannual merry go round.
I agree. They've managed to make what amounts to doing nothing look half hearted.
DeleteLike it or not 05:43, the Madeleine case has a huge worldwide audience, and the McCanns themselves created it! All those awareness campaigns, paying £500k to stay on the front pages for a year, all the campaign literature translated into different languages.
DeleteThere is still a huge amount of interest in the Madeleine case, even outside this tiny corner of the internet. It is a mystery that is still unsolved, and human beings as problem solvers, will attempt to solve it.
The chances are however, the case will gain a whole new audience. It is 12 years old, many people do not know about the Madeleine case, or have only headline skimming knowledge, they don't know the details and they have probably never heard of Goncalo Amaral.
You, and indeed the McCanns are very cynical about it, why? It will reach far more people than their own efforts and may provide leads or sightings. I am sure if the mother of Ben Needham were ever offered such an opportunity she would leap at it.
I remain open minded about the production. I understand all the difficulties they must have faced or are facing, getting hold of information. Not to mention there are two live police investigations, both of whom appear to be working under Judicial Secrecy.
If the makers are American, and I think they are, they will not be affected by the sinister hold the McCanns seem to have over the British Establishment. Nor are they likely to have their names trashed and never being able to work in the mainstream again. For British journalists, this case is the kiss of death.
I wonder if the production has been put under scrutiny by the McCanns lawyers. I'm guessing no, in fact I doubt they will even get a preview. The thing is however, are the McCanns in a position to sue anybody. Their massive defeat in the Portuguese Supreme Court, has weakened their position dramatically.
So too the work of Operation Grange. Their main claim against Goncalo Amaral was that if people believed Madeleine was dead they would not look for her. OG did not have to say anything, but they did. DCI Redwood said Madeleine may not have been alive when she left the apartment, and the digs were a huge clue they were looking for a body. The claim that it is evil to assume Madeleine is dead, holds no water. It is delusional to think that she is not dead.
But I look forward to it with great interest, I am sure there will be much to discuss!
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 March 2019 at 15:08
Delete''Like it or not 05:43, the Madeleine case has a huge worldwide audience, and the McCanns themselves created it!''
I acknowledged the audience size, Bella. That doesn't mean much though. Football has a bigger audience and that get's a bit 'samey' often enough. But at least football has twists and turns we can witness. The disappearance of a child created the audience. The twin targets of Mum and dad is what kept them viewing.
''paying £500k to stay on the front pages for a year, all the campaign literature translated into different languages. ''
You picked a meme i hadn't heard for a few weeks. Bell ? Who recommended him and what reasons did the McCanns have to mistrust him before he took his money ?
''There is still a huge amount of interest in the Madeleine case, even outside this tiny corner of the internet. It is a mystery that is still unsolved, and human beings as problem solvers, will attempt to solve it. ''
They've been trying for 12 years. Nothing. How can they solve it. If there's no evidence or clues they have nothing to use. The police can't for the same reasons.An online general consensus isn't a solution, it's a really big virtual sewing circle.
''You, and indeed the McCanns are very cynical about it, why? It will reach far more people than their own efforts and may provide leads or sightings''
That's actually why I'm cynical.It probably will happen. I mentioned deja vu-remember ? I just said it again. We've seen it. But as i said, at least we knew what the child looked like then. Nobody can now.But as long as there are fools providing a readership for tabloids- 'leads and sightings' will happen again and go nowhere again as they'll be lies - again
It doesn't matter if the production is american, british, bulgarian or martian.Nothing has happened in 12 years so they can't show anything we do't know.If they had anything of any worth they've been withholding it from the police.No chance.And i wouldn't bother anticipating the scrutiny of the McCann lawyers. The same problem prevents a need. Nothing's happened. If they invent anything they're lying unless they can prove it.They'll- at best- present an agenda that tries to be subtle and hope that it won't be spotted. But they know the majority pf their audience want to hear only one thing...
Operation Grange will be extras.They're too shy for a bigger role.
Much to repeat, much to rehash, much to add to with an aim of creating more hostility. Bu, in terms of anything being added to the investigation or to solving it, don't hold your breath.It's already a repeat and it hasn't been aired yet...
Anonymous7 March 2019 at 05:43
Delete''I said elsewhere that i don't see how the hype and excitement that heralded the announcement of this venture was being generated...the bottom line is that it's just the story we all know being retold with slicker lighting.What can they show us of Madeleine ? She'd be almost 16 years old when this thing is aired.She was almost 4 when it happened... It's a feeding frenzy for the online obsessives;eight weeks of 'catch up' after every episode. Every line re-analysed. Every statement argued over( again)''
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton7 March 2019 at 15:08
''The claim that it is evil to assume Madeleine is dead, holds no water. It is delusional to think that she is not dead.But I look forward to it with great interest, I am sure there will be much to discuss!''
That's the exact kind of nonsense i was talking about.It is delusional to think she is not dead she says.I wonder how many of the 30 plus detectives she often blindly defends would agree.But they don't hate anyone, they have to remain objective .If it's 'delusional' how about you demonstrate why it's delusional ? maybe you could ask why the police are still considering ALL options and not just that of the haters.
But..an hour later..what do we get ?
'MADELEINE NETFLIX DOCUMENTARY'
A new thread dedicated to the documentary nobody has seen yet.But that doesn't matter to the group who favour scrutinising things that can't be seen or found.It keeps them occupoied.
Shame really. I was going to suggest an interesting topic for a new thread that would be worth discussing. It was about the case though, not a documentary or film..
''The claim that it is evil to assume Madeleine is dead, holds no water. It is delusional to think that she is not dead.''
DeleteSays the authority on everything, Ros.That's the same Ros who, when pressed about Madeleine's fate and alleged death, is quick to say she doesn't know it and doesn't pretend to know what happened to her or if she's dead or alive. We really need a dictionary of Ros terms if we want to understand her technique of lying.She lies to herself so often about so much it's become her normal state.That's why she doesn't understand when she's lying or how and accuses others randomly of lying.Strange woman.
Hi Anon7 March 2019 at 05:43
ReplyDelete"We did not see - and still do not see - how this programme will help the search for Madeleine and, particularly given there is an active police investigation, it could potentially hinder it''.
Has it never occurred to them, that they may've hindered the first Portuguese investigation in 2007/08? So much for their self insight.
what does that have to do with the present and the upcoming netflix production ? Do the police consider that they hindered anything ?
DeleteHi Anon7 March 2019 at 13:33
Delete"what does that have to do with the present and the upcoming netflix production ?
They didn't care a shit about the advice from the Portuguese PJ not to publish a photo of Madeleine as it could make the abductor panic and harm Madeleine.
As arguidos their refusal to co-operate became so obvious. So how come it is so important to respect an ongoing investigation now, when it wasn't at all important to them in the early days.
"Do the police consider that they hindered anything ?"
The Portuguese PJ must have thought so, considering Kate's lack of co-operation, when she as an arguido refused to answer any of the questions she was asked. If the PJ don't understand that she deliberately sabotaged that first and only public police investigation as much as she possibly could, they must be naive and perhaps they are, but yet I find it hard to believe.
you find anything that isn't invented or spiteful hard to believe. You have a problem.
Deletehave a day off bjorn
Delete"... the series has access to never-before-heard testimonies from those at the heart of the story including friends of the McCann family, investigators working the case and from those who became the subjects of media speculation and rumour."
ReplyDeletehttps://www.theolivepress.es/spain-news/2019/03/07/netflix-announces-madeleine-mccann-documentary-featuring-the-olive-press-and-never-before-heard-testimonies/
anon @ 13:33
ReplyDeleteSo you want to censor Ros's blog and only talk of the particular blog title and not anything else.
It's a blog not a forum!
Deletewhat are you babbling on about 14:43
Delete