I have to admit that by the end of my 8 hour binge watching marathon my own beliefs and what I know about this case were shaken if not stirred. The subtext unsettled me, the tirade of spokespeople on behalf of the parents got through, even that of the painfully naïve Hubbards. And yes, I asked myself, what if I'm wrong? If my former girl crush Sandra Felgueres can do an about turn, why can't I?
As my regular readers know, I have no problem with admitting when I am wrong. Being wrong is usually accompanied by better and further knowledge and I'm all about enlightenment. In this case, am I wrong or are other people trying to seduce me into sharing the same beliefs as them? The devil works in mysterious ways.
The beliefs of Summers, Swan and Jim Gamble have now gone mainstream, and by mainstream, I mean global. The book of Summers and Swan was completely discredited on Amazon and failed to have any impact on public opinion. That it's release coincided with a shameful publicity stunt by Team McCann and Sky News that resulted in the death of a so called internet troll, simply added to the belief that the book was part of an establishment cover up.
And for me this is where the chills began to run down the spine. Was I wrong? About the parents? nah, those points that took me beyond reasonable doubt are as glaring as they ever were. About Operation Grange and the likelihood of a cover up, OMG, is it possible the 'establishment' have no intention whatsoever of letting the Great British public know what happened to Madeleine McCann? That possibility now seems very real. I will probably now be inundated with 'told you so' posts As the turmoil within my head continues.
My faith in human nature was blown to smithereens by my realisation that Madeleine's parents may have been lying. Believe me, it does not feel good to have such heinous thoughts, ignorant bliss has a lot going for it, it tends to keep you step with your fellow human beings. For me that feeling of dissonance is a way of life, but this time, I was actually on a hit list, as indeed were many others who did not buy the abduction story. Why would an innocent family go to so much trouble to seek and destroy those online who do not believe them? It's things like that that make them appear guilty.
Today my faith is once again shaken to the core. Is it possible 30+ homicide officers have been working towards a diplomatic way out of this never ending conundrum? Is it their failure to find a way to exonerate the McCanns that takes this investigation into it 's 7th and 8th year? I'm having now to revisit all those 'wtf' moments that turned the McCanns from negligent parents into national treasures. The circus is back.
Not changed my mind, but I'm losing hope of a conviction.
ReplyDeleteIt has narrowed my focus down to the dog alerts.
I have changed my mind about the story that any checks were being made on the kids at all. That does give the abduction theory more traction.
But then there are those pesky dogs.
The behaviour of the McCanns and friends gives us nothing. I think many people really don't have understand the psychopathic, god complex types that work in health care at all levels.
I admit I have seen only bad guys and good guys. I can now accept that the cops were being leaned on to get a cinviction.
But, it always comes back to the dogs.
Your open minded, considered, posts are a breath of fresh air Oscar, many thanks.
DeleteThe parents and their friends are definitely covering something up. Is it the negligence, which could have cost the medics their careers, or is something more sinister?
I have always been reluctant to use the phrase 'God Complex' not because it doesn't play such a huge part in the behaviour of the parents and their friends, but because I didn't want to offend doctors in general, lol.
Tis true in our society we treat doctors like Gods. Usually because our lives literally depend on them. But I do have to wonder at the reverence they are given, especially when doing ward rounds surrounded by students. Hard not to let that go to your head.
Those pesky dogs. Agree. One mistake, err, maybe, two at a real push, but 11 - just not possible. Mr. Grime's dogs are the best of their kind in the world. It is odd that the supporters of the McCanns use Mr. Grime's words to exonerate them, namely the part where he says the alerts need to be corroborated. I am sure if Mr. Grime were giving evidence, as he did in the D'Andre Lane trial, he would be given the time and platform to explain just how useful his dogs alerts are.
I agree, the original investigation was horribly leaned on. The British consulate were there the very next day demanding it be solved immediately. Sky News gave the family their own channel urging people to bombard the PJ with sightings and useless information. The investigation was operating in the midst of a circus.
Finally, again the dogs. We can't unsee them barking in the McCanns apartment and car. They stopped the search for Madeleine (by the police) in 2007. It would take a huge leap of faith to believe that the dogs were wrong, but astonishingly there are people in high places who do. Perhaps they should get on a plane where a sniffer dog has alerted to a bomb and see how that goes.
The 'pesky dog alerts' were deemed unreliable. Why suggest all health workers on all levels have a God complex and what does that have to do with the case ? If the cops were being 'leaned on' to get a conviction why didn't they get one. They had enough so called evidence to fit anyone up . But the evidence was made to be 'unreliable' . Why do that if the main aim was to get a conviction. What would the charge be anyway ? Nobody has said the child dies and if they did they need to find proof that an abductor didn't kill her.
Delete''Your open minded, considered, posts are a breath of fresh air Oscar, many thanks''
Deletedefine open minded
''The parents and their friends are definitely covering something up. Is it the negligence, which could have cost the medics their careers, or is something more sinister?''
DeleteIf it's definite, why are you asking questions about it ?
''Tis true in our society we treat doctors like Gods. ''
Dr Shipman. Need some more 'Gods' who were above the law ?
https://www.ranker.com/list/serial-killers-who-were-doctors/ranker-crime
So we're going with parents-as-Gods now. Did parents-as-middle-class-aspirationals get old ?
''Those pesky dogs. Agree. One mistake, err, maybe, two at a real push, but 11 - just not possible. Mr. Grime's dogs are the best of their kind in the world. It is odd that the supporters of the McCanns use Mr. Grime's words to exonerate them,''
Mister Grimes' words are the only words that matter aren't they ?Or doesn't he know as much as people on the internet that 'saw this video once'.
''I am sure if Mr. Grime were giving evidence, as he did in the D'Andre Lane trial, he would be given the time and platform to explain just how useful his dogs alerts are.''
I agree. And the prosecution would be on the floor from there.
''Finally, again the dogs. We can't unsee them barking in the McCanns apartment and car''
Do you think Grime 'unseen' them then ?
''It would take a huge leap of faith to believe that the dogs were wrong, but astonishingly there are people in high places who do. ''
Because the expert, their handler, grime, said it's so.
''Perhaps they should get on a plane where a sniffer dog has alerted to a bomb and see how that goes.''
And if one alerts and a bomb is found we know the alert could be trusted. What if they alert and no bomb is found ?
I think trying to imply Grime is a liar is a low level to sink to.
'I think trying to imply Grime is a liar is a low level to sink to'. Another pointless lie. Why do you do it? Is it some sort of mental condition?
DeleteI have nothing but respect for Martin Grime and his work, you have taken a few of his words and are using them out of context in a desperate attempt to fool the public into believing the dog handler is on the parents side. Let's see what happens when Martin Grime has more than a few words.
But honestly your little game of 'you must be calling the police liars, you must be calling the dog handler a liar - is pure playground - ages 2 to 10. You do exactly the same as Bennett, you fill in the gaps with whatever weirdo shit is going on in your head. You would like me to call Mr. Grime a liar and if I don't, you will say I did anyway.
That's a pretty low level to sink, what are y ou afraid of?
What are you on about Ros ? Grime has said the dogs alerts were inconclusive.They needed corroborating. They are NOT evidence. You are disagreeing and forwarding the dog alerts as evidence.You are overruling the expert you're pretending to respect because blackening the McCanns name is more important to you.Anyone reading you recently can see this.Are we all suffering a mental condition ? How gracious.
Delete14:24, I am a health worker. Put it this way, when I watch films like One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, it sends a shiver down my spine.
ReplyDeleteLet's just say, "you don't have to be a psychopath to work here, but it helps!"
I've seen enough people at work who believe that it is their very presence that heals the sick. I have also seen mistakes at all levels covered up by a very well oiled, and vicious machine.
For that reason, I can accept that there are people who, even after losing a child (literally and figuratively) could act in a way that other people would find very strange.
We deal with death, and its aftermath all the time. We may well be more blunted to its impact on our emotions than others - even when it is a member of our family that has died.
A colleague came to work the morning his son committed suicide. There's no accounting for how people act.
For that reason, I won't say that the McCann's cool, and to some callous behaviour, after losing Madeleine cannot be taken to be show guilt.
I take your points.
DeleteI've experienced arrogance from MHS workers on different levels. I lost my mother 3 years ago. I had to break the jaw of a manager who had betrayed my trust as well as hers and that led to her going. I was called a thug for it.I then set about showing that there was a lot more to me than that and took him down legally, then had all his NHS contracts taken away and then his home shut down.I had my eyes opened then. I've met GPs who probably wouldn't recognise most of their patients because they never look at them. I wouldn't call it a God complex, I'd call it a superior air and arrogance. Unless you pay private of course, they love you then.
The detachment doctors and nurses have comes with the territory.It wouldn't do to get emotionally attached to a patient or client. You'd spend half of your life in tears. The distance between them and their patients is safe for them.You're just a unit to them- as is the bed your occupying.There are some that i refer to as 'old schoolers' in the NHS. They have the job because it means something to them; it's a vocation.They're getting less and less..
If we consider that these doctors have lost their toddler- can we really understand their heads ? Scenario one is this : If the child has been abducted then in their mind she is still OK. So no need for outpourings of grief. Tears of anger and fear maybe. Scenario two - the child is dead. They'd surely go to pieces. They left her alone and then she was dead. They'd be destroyed.Remember, until somebody says differently, this is still officially a missing child case.Not a death. Those who have stated that they refuse to accept the lack of evidence is real and that the dogs found evidence of death have already declared the child dead.Adding the other two to that two they say the parents must have done it. Therefore their behaviour should be that of parents grieving over the death of their child.But if they aren't doing that you won't see it.The accusers simply say that's further evidence of their cold-bloodedness.
Subjective interpretation will always meet with an opposite subjective interpretation. But evidence will always speak impartially.If you allow it a voice.
Hmm. Part 1 of your post I found very disturbing 19:04, you splashed on way too much machismo there and as Zsa Zsa Gabor once famously said macho isn't very mucho. Are you letting us all know, my male readers especially that you are a hard man?
DeleteI'm afraid all the subjective interpreting in the world will not take away the fact that blood dog alerted to blood and the cadaver dog alerted to odour of cadaver. We've not only read about it, we have seen it.
You will always have difficulty persuading those who have seen dog videos to believe on this occasion they were wrong 11 times. Yes I know the alerts need corroborative evidence in a court room setting, but this is not a court room.
Funnily enough I agree with your final sentence, evidence will always speak impartially, I don't think anyone can accuse the dogs of being biased.
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton18 March 2019 at 19:29
Delete''Hmm. Part 1 of your post I found very disturbing 19:04, you splashed on way too much machismo there and as Zsa Zsa Gabor once famously said macho isn't very mucho. Are you letting us all know, my male readers especially that you are a hard man?''
I remember as though it was yesterday picking my frail old mother off the floor and carrying her like a broken doll and placing her back into her bed.It was winter and she had been on the floor all night. I had entrusted a man to provide care 4 times a day as there were aspects i could no longer cover and i couldn't be there 24/7. He assured me it was all organised. It wasn't.She had been left and nobody called me to let me know.I remember the rage in me as i laid her in her bed and turned her fire on and waited for an ambulance. A month later she was back home and it happened again.This time she wasn't so lucky.The woman who had raised me and my brother from our teen years and seen some real troubles and fought through them all was gone.He was lucky i never killed him.Human emotion is often complex. But sometimes it's raw. You can dismiss it as macho and quote some film star like you're in a cocktail party but i expect nothing more. Empathy would choke you.
The forensics lab had microscopes. You had youtube.You had subjective interpretation skills, that is drawing superficial conclusions. You dream that DNA is waiting for even more advances to nail your suspects but are happy to cite a youtube viewing as 'evidence' enough.
''You will always have difficulty persuading those who have seen dog videos to believe on this occasion they were wrong 11 times. ''
So who persuaded the detectives who are investigating the case ?
''Funnily enough I agree with your final sentence, evidence will always speak impartially, I don't think anyone can accuse the dogs of being biased.''
Exactly. Who did they say the blood, dna and smell came from. Who did they say caused the death and what was the cause of death.If they bark that I'm in.
''But honestly your little game of 'you must be calling the police liars, you must be calling the dog handler a liar - is pure playground - ages 2 to 10. You do exactly the same as Bennett, you fill in the gaps with whatever weirdo shit is going on in your head. You would like me to call Mr. Grime a liar and if I don't, you will say I did anyway.''
DeleteThe language is impressive. And you call others names....
Grime has stated that the alerts are not conclusive. They need corroborating. They can't be called 'evidence'.
You say they are all evidence and the dogs can't be wrong.
Therefore, in your interpretation, Grim has to be either wrong or lying. You can't say you respect and believe him but just not for this case. This is really easy to understand. Why are you refusing to ? What are you afraid of ?
19:04, did you, aye? I actually find any of what you wrote hard to believe.
DeleteThanks for the lecture on transference though. It would be even more useful if you weren't just repeating what I just told you.
I can see why you seem so well versed in all things God complex.
DeleteGood for you.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteRosalind, I haven't changed my mind one iota since I first heard of Madeleine's disappearancethe next day and I won't unless a live child is produced.
ReplyDeleteEverything about this case is wrong from the involvement of our British Embassy - who are not permitted to interfere with a police case- to the wooshing of curtains, open windows, changed testimonies, unanswered police questions,media hype, the hiring of legal companies specialising in extradition and sueing anyone who has the temerity to express an opinion not in accordance with McCannspeak.
And the dogs, can you imagine being told of the dog's findings when your own child is missing? Most people would be totally on their knees in anguish, certainly not rejecting the findings. If Madeleine just disappeared, as they say she did, how could they dismiss the dogs and why would they? But they did.
Don't be swayed Rosalind, the police must be doing somenthing with the money so there's still hope.
That's an awfully long list you've created there. I suppose policemen are only human and prone to err. They could be forgiven i suppose for missing one of the boxes you have so helpfully checked for us. But my question has to be this : How could so many policemen miss so many clues and not spotted it in so many years ? I won't ask what they could be doing with the money, the answer would probably make me laugh and this is a serious subject. But we'll go with all the 'musts' and 'probablies'. they look solid.
Delete"The 'pesky dog alerts' were deemed unreliable."
ReplyDeleteWho by, why are they unreliable?
"Why suggest all health workers on all levels have a God complex and what does that have to do with the case ?"
The god complex means that some people believe they are special and above the law. So, the very fact that someone has the audacity to ask them questions about their daughters' disappearance is an affront to their perception of their importance in the world.
Or, it could mean that the suggestions and actions of inferior beings (ie everyone) about the best way to proceed finding their child might be ignored - even if they are coming from people who actually know a bit about it.
(If you've ever tried to tell a doctor they are wrong, you'll know what I mean.)
"If the cops were being 'leaned on' to get a conviction why didn't they get one."
Ask the cops - they didn't manage one with Murat. When they moved to the next arguida they weren't allowed a proper interrogation, and the DNA evidence was inconclusive.
"They had enough so called evidence to fit anyone up . But the evidence was made to be 'unreliable' . Why do that if the main aim was to get a conviction. What would the charge be anyway ?"
I haven't got a clue what you're talking about here, sorry.
"Nobody has said the child dies and if they did they need to find proof that an abductor didn't kill her."
The dogs alerted to the scent of death in 5a, the hire car and the McCanns villa - and on Cuddle Cat. There is a strong suspicion of a death.
You're right the possibility that the abductor killed her has to be explored, it now seems likely that the 20 minute checks weren't happening. As creatures of habit, it did make their child a sitting duck for an abductor, knowing that there was little chance of being disturbed, and that she would be alone every night.
I am open minded enough to acknowledge that, having found the child missing, they concentrated on a cock a menny version of events, and a poorly staged crime scene, with the sole intention of covering up their neglect.
The child is either dead or abducted and you think the first thought was to cover up their neglect ?
DeleteWhy didn't the experienced detectives think the scene was poorly staged. Why hasn't the review thought about it and considered that ?
If the priority was just to get an arrest, they could have lied about the alerts and said the evidence of the scent/ blood / dna was evidence and convinced a jury of whoever it was, a parents, both or Murat.But they didn't. Does this mean that the evidence really is useless or they weren't in a hurry for an arrest.
No, I didn't say that. I said I accept it as a possible explanation.
DeleteYou'd have to ask the detectives why they didn't think it was poorly staged. Particularly the one who said it was poorly staged in the Netflix documentary.
I don't know enough about Portuguese law to answer your last point.
My last point was in response to your assertion that the remit was to get an arrest PDQ regardless; being 'leaned on'. If that was the priority they had enough circumstantial evidence and could well have promoted the dog alerts and blood and so on and the jury wold buy it. How do i reach that conclusion ? Because a jury is 12 men and women from a cross section of that other court- 'public opinion'. So either they weren't leaned on to get someone and make the case go away or the evidence was to weak to withstand cross examination in court...
DeleteI think the evidence was too weak to withstand cross examination in court.
DeleteI've said before, it's currently standing at Not Proven.
Evidence can't stand as not proven. It stands as evidence or not evidence.
DeleteNot Proven is a verdict in Scots Law. It basically says there is not enough evidence to convict you.
DeleteEvidence is the basis of a verdict.
Isn't it the basis of a credible case ?
DeleteYes, a credible case would lead to a verdict.
DeleteI have to partake some sad news. Blacksmith has passed away! I for one will miss his comments and blog immensely. RIP
ReplyDeleteCarolina
Dear Madeliene, feel so sad and sorry youve been let down by the people who should have loved and protected you the most and so many others.
ReplyDeleteSadly the people who do care havnt got a strong enough voice because the people who supposedly run our country, who stand up to say how devastated and appalled they are when theres been a disaster, blah, blah, are just puppets whoes strings are being pulled by rich, unfluential people who are morally corrupt, people who are able to set agendas and remits, tying our police forces hands behind their backs. We must be a laughing stock. Dear Madeliene, all we can do is to pray and hope that one day you will get justice you deserve and then can be left in peace.
Dear Anonymous 17 : 34
Deletemelodrama aside, who are you accusing and what of ?It looks like you're saying the politicians won't allow this to be solved. Why wouldn't they want that do you think ?
19.07 Melodramatic or not, I do feel Madeliene has been let down and theres is some manipulation going on to stop this investigation from being properly looked into. As to who or why ?
DeleteGod knows, wish I did.
Rosalind I've just heard some sad news that Blacksmith has died and I know you thought highly of him, as many did including me.
ReplyDeleteI wondered why he hadn't posted for so ling, he'll be sadly missed.
Relax Ros , they did it alright.The tsunami of propaganda simply confirms they are being protected.
ReplyDeleteThat is the real puzzle here.
Loyal Reader.
What tsunami of propaganda. I thought the likes of Bennet and Hall wee in charge of that
DeleteAbsolutely shocked and saddened to hear of the death of John Blacksmith. For so long he was the voice of sanity in this case and a very good online friend. I hope his brilliant bureau will be preserved, it's a good place to go when the bs gets you down. I will truly miss him.
ReplyDeleteJust been reading about the passing of the Blacksmith,not that I agree with everything he wrote but his blog will be missed,RIP.
ReplyDeleteMixed thinking on what you do with replies no doubt the trolls will be out running him down,maybe they ought to be allowed to see just what kind of people speak on behalf of Madeleine McCann.
nobody's run him down
DeleteHello Rosalinda, and thanks a lot for your summary and comments about the Netflix doc. I’ll watch it later.
ReplyDeleteSo sad to hear about John Blacksmith. He taught me quite a few things about the British society, media and literature here on your blog. Though I didn't quite get to know him, he somehow felt like friend of mine.
”It now appears she deeply regrets her former stance and the tough questions she posed to the parents”
I’ve said it before Rosalinda. I became so disappointed with Sandra Felgueiras, as I watched her interviewing the McCanns, after their arguido status had been lifted.
I then realised that her interview was not at all about seeking the truth, but just about more attention and recognition as a media personality. I could so clearly see in her and Gerry’s facial expressions, that they had a kind of flirtatious relationship with each other, which spontaneously came about while the conversation was going on. It was, in fact, Sandra Felgueiras herself, who allowed Gerry to joke off her question about the scent of death, which from her perspective was nothing but a joke, because she couldn’t possibly have believed in the accuracy of the dogs’ alerts, given that she so easily let Gerry get away with “ask the dogs Sandra”, and his inappropriate duping smile. What happened in that instant would’ve made any serious journalist fly into rage and ask a number of follow-up questions, but she didn’t.
The whole interview became a nice and cosy little chat like the one Kate describes in her book, telling us how Clement Freud manages to comfort her by joking about the dogs’ barking. Serious stuff to most people I’d assume, but not to the McCanns, Clement Freud, Clarence Mitchell and apparently not to Sandra Felgueiras either.
The whole Madeleine case has now become a struggle between the established society (including the American, the Portuguese and the British ones with all their traditional media) and all the sceptics on social media. I really wish that a little British or Portuguese girl like the global Swedish phenomenon Greta Thunberg, who dares challenge politicians as well as media, would turn up to give Madeleine a voice. Only hypocrites can still see the new clothes that the McCanns have tried to make us see for almost 12 years, but not an innocent child.
So Sandra was all things nice. Then she spoke against a man who had lied to her.Maybe, having some actual intelligence, she realised her original stance had been tainted by information she had been given that she assumed she could trust.Then she found out the information had come in the shape of lies from someone with his own agenda instead. Thus, logically, she opened her mind and removed her blinkers.Now with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, the antis are coming out saying things like you're saying. leave the lady alone. She had the courage to think for herself. Or is that why you don't like her now.
DeleteAnon 18 March 2019 at 20:38
DeleteHas Sandra Felgueiras ever claimed or implied that the McCanns could be guilty? Have you got a link?
I didn't say she claimed or implied that the McCanns could be guilty.
DeleteWho said she'd claimed or implied anything ?
DeleteNow that Blacksmith/Antony Sharples has passed on,who is going to tell us all now that Grange is genuine?
ReplyDeleteErr, that's pretty much what I have been saying too, but I know what you mean, JB was far more resolute than I and unswayed by the cover up arguments, in many ways I saw him as a mentor as well as a dear friend. I treasure the contributions he made on here and I will return to them again and again I am sure. His words are not only intelligent and insightful, but they provide the sane narrative to the Madeleine case, and for that John will always be remembered.
DeleteI'm not going to be a hypocrite because of somebody's passing. I crossed swords a few times with JB and his attitude needed adjusting as i saw it.Having said that, I can't fault him for the passion and the determination that drove him to find the right thing and hope to contribute in any way he could to the solution of this case and justice for a little girl he-like us all- never even knew.There's no bad in that, only good.And I respect that. We need that kind of spirit everywhere.
DeleteMy thoughts go to his family and i hope they find the strength to to move through this dark passage of time and come out in light and holding his memory close. God bless, JB.
Ziggy Sawdust
I echo your post in its entirety, Ziggy Sawdust.
DeleteSafe passage, John Blacksmith.
Respect. Peace.
T
Bless you Ziggy. It is at times like these that people show their true characters and for those kind thoughtful words, you have gone up my estimation.
DeleteI must admit I am saddened to see so little response to John's passing on social media. For me it feels a bit like seeing Dickens' ghost from Christmas future, yes you too, will be as quickly forgotten. Unfortunately the twitter hashtag is dominated by those who prefer the more salacious myths that surround this case. My own blog is read by hundreds, maybe thousands but on twitter it is ignored. My Keep it Simple Stupid (KISS) philosophy is not scandalous enough, some have felt the need to sex it up.
Your kind tribute to JB, will long be remembered Ziggy, it showed class I did not think you had. No dig was intended there, it was kind of a backhanded compliment.
Namaste.
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton 19 March 2019 at 17:51
DeleteRosalinda dear
Together we (must) stand.
Mournfully
Pooh
Thank you both. I meant every word.
DeleteI haven't been on a social network page for about 7 years but i hear facebook have pages or the facility to create pages of tribute for times like this. Maybe the response to the passing has been quiet as it hasn't reached everyone or they feel awkward just posting blog comments. It might be a good idea to see if one exists or one of his online friends cold set one up and let his family know..
ZS
@21:00
Delete“Thank you both. I meant every word.”
Thank you, comrade, I know you did.
I’m not involved in any social network, can’t help with that.
Peace.
Pooh
I to was a great fan of Blacksmiths and enjoyed his blog very much, he shall be missed by me also.God bless.
DeleteJust as an aside, why did the netflix doc say that Martin smith had changed his mind re his sighting? Gemma O`D has since been on twitter to reiterate that he has done no such thing. If they can lie on the Netflix doc about one thing, then I have to assume that I cannot in good faith believe in any of the content of this documentary, that and Pat Browns review convinced me my time would be better spent doing something else.
Regards Ros
AFAN
There is something absolutely bizarre about the handling of this case, Operation Grange doesn’t even give the appearance of a bona fide investigation despite the millions spent, senior SY officers are prepared to embarrass themselves on national TV, talking absolute b......s, as if they’ve lost touch with reality. The only explanation that makes sense is that there is an official concerted effort to suppress the truth. The documentary was deliberately flawed, an exercise in omission, almost as if it had been directed by the Team McCann.
ReplyDeleteWhy would the McCanns refuse to take part ? An opportunity to appeal for sympathy and support. Why would SY officers, and officers in OG go to such lengths to suppress the truth just to protect the McCanns ? Have you a sensible answer to that ?
Deletehad the parents been arrested, charged and found guilty of killing their child or burying her after an accident they'd be due for parole by now.Well one of them would be.The other would have been freed years ago or only have received a suspended sentence. A prosecution would struggle to nail them both for murder if both pled not guilty.It would have been quicker and easier and far less expensive and embarrassing for them ( SY/PJ/OG) to arrest and charge. But you think all of these respected and experienced officers are embarrassing themselves and disgracing their uniforms by colluding to suppress truth, protect to Brits because they're doctors and willingly letting themselves be party to perverting the course of justice. For two doctors. They've even somehow teamed up with Netflix to make a propaganda film. Don't you see how paranoid that all reads ? They're innocent until proven guilty. It's simple. If they have no evidence now after 12 years it's over . Not just for those wanting to see more pain inflicted on the parents for their own personal reasons obviously, but as an investigation. A real one anyway.All it is now, and all it has been for 10 years, is a conversation piece. Nothing whatsoever suggests it will ever be more than that.
I tend to agree. Unless there is some advance in DNA that would allow us to know whose DNA was in the hire car.
DeleteAll we have is a strong suspicion about whose DNA it was, because the dogs have never been wrong.
@ Oscar Slater19 March 2019 at 11:39
Delete"An attempt to obtain a DNA profile from any cellular material recovered from one area of the plastic luggage component (286C/2007-CRL(10(2))) from the motor vehicle was unsuccessful in that no DNA profiles were obtained.
A low level mixed DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least two people was obtained from a second area of the plastic luggage component (286C/2007-CRL(10(2))) from the motor vehicle. In my opinion this result is too complex to interpret at this stage.
A low level mixed DNA result which appeared to have originated from at least three people was obtained from cellular material recovered from the fibre coated luggage component (286C/2007-CRL(10(1))) from the motor vehicle. In my opinion this result is too complex to interpret at this stage.
A low level incomplete DNA profile which matched the corresponding components in the DNA profile of Gerald McCann was obtained from cellular material on the key card (286C/2007-CRL(12)). This sample has not been sent for further testing using LCN DNA profiling tests."
https://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/JOHN_LOWE.htm#p10p2617-2623
Yes, so it will take advances in DNA research to identify who the mixed DNA is from.
DeleteWhy do people keep telling me what I already know?
Why do you keep trying to overrule Martin Grime ? he couldn't offer any findings as evidence of anything or against anyone. Then he didn't suspect anyone from the beginning and try to find something to fit his theory. Boring, I know. But scientifically sound.
DeleteThere's a difference between knowing something and understanding it.
DeleteAnonymous18 March 2019 at 21:50
Delete''The documentary was deliberately flawed, an exercise in omission, almost as if it had been directed by the Team McCann''
What a silly observation.
Consider the following and the amount of power they have.
Prime Minster. Home / Foreign Sceretary.MI5 / 6. Commisioner of Police.
versus
GP. Cardiologist. Friend of previous two.
You think the latter two and friends could control all those aforementioned ? How wold that possibly work ? If you insist on trying to drum up a bit of extra 'anti- Mccannism', at least think it out first.
Sorry 13:16, in what way am I trying to overrule Martin Grime?
DeleteAnonymous19 March 2019 at 12:58
DeleteStrange isn't it. This case has been labelled as complex.A convenient label intended to explain the 12 years of complete nothingness rather than admitting defeat.The evidence is inconclusive or not there. The apparently implied evidence is baffling forensic examination. How many real crimes have we read about and seen re-enacted for documentaries explaining how DNA advances solved complex or baffling crimes that had been considered unsolvable. Yet the one case that has politicians crawling all over it is beyond the power and talent of forensic examination. What a coincidence.
Oscar Slater19 March 2019 at 14:19
Delete''Sorry 13:16, in what way am I trying to overrule Martin Grime?''
Grime said there is not enough evidence and it needs corroborating to be called evidence of a crime.
You say the alerts he refers to are the evidence of a crime.
Oscar Slater19 March 2019 at 13:05
Delete''Yes, so it will take advances in DNA research to identify who the mixed DNA is from.
Why do people keep telling me what I already know?''
Now you know that the alerts aren't evidence.Now you know we can't discuss them as evidence if they aren't evidence.If the advances in DNA analysis are ever made then we will have to see if they too deny the alerts a voice won't we.If they do it again what do wait for ? Advances in Psychokinesis ?
No, I didn't. I say they raise a strong suspicion of a crime.
DeleteNobody is disputing that corroborative evidence is required, and I think that's what Grimes referred to.
McCann's phone records withheld.
ReplyDeleteMcCann's bank records withheld.
McCann's credit card records withheld.
Madeleine's medical records withheld.
Photos from holidaymakers withheld.
Info on Robert Murat withheld.
Gasper's statement withheld.
Actively encouraged witnesses to phone the McCann's directly.
Actively encouraged and promoted McCann's fighting fund, when they were suspects.
Gave legal advice to both witnesses and official suspects.
Gave Gerry standing ovation at bravery awards.
Made Gerry guest speaker at police conference.
Gave Gerry private tour of major incident room, while investigation ongoing.
The head of ACPO, Chief Constable Jones, gave Gerry his private phone number and discussed details of the investigation with him.
The Chief Constable of South Yorkshire gave Gerry his private phone number to talk over Eddie and Keela's findings.
The Head of Leics CID, over familiar relationship with witnesses and official suspects (call me anytime, Stu).
Gave Kate and Gerry a number of restricted police and CEOP manuals to allow them to swat up.
The farcical conduct of Tapas rogatory interviews.
The heads of Leics CID assisting Gerry with his wider agenda project.
Leics police allowing Gerry to read confidential witness statements, while suspects, (Cooper etc).
The efforts to show Tanner as a reliable witness.
The production of crecheman in the same clothes.
The wild digging of holes in PDL.
Police Officers appearing on breakfast TV sofa's to promote the abduction.
Dubious actions taken against online trolls.
Just a few of the actions carried out by UK police officers.
Can anybody explain why they believe these actions have helped the PJ find justice for Madeleine McCann.
Flawed investigation by the PJ, is it any wonder when this is the close cooperation and assistance provided.
How many of the above are in the Netflix soap.
I prefer to concentrate on the fact that the dogs alerted to cadaverine and blood.
DeleteThere are so many possible explanations for what you are offering up that it won't get us anywhere.
A lot gets made of the Gaspar statement.
DeleteJust because people act like complete dicks at the dinner table doesn't make them paedophiles. The socially inadequate and immature think all sorts of things are funny that other people find offensive.
Better just to accept that Gerry and his pals are pretty much a bunch of plonkers than to go seeing things that aren't there.
Where do - according to Grime - inconclusive alerts get us ?
DeleteJJ (12:51)
DeleteNational security?
Can we add the Netflix soap to the list as one of the indirect actions carried out by the authorities?
Ros will assure us all how close the PJ and SY are and talk about some mythical financial and moral support SY officers gave to Amaral. That, if it was real, would have been done in private. But it was in the newspapers. It was 'leaked' by someone. The obvious intention would seem to have been to sell the idea of the mythical comradery which further implies that the UK officers are as one with Amaral and his unfounded notions of what happened to Madeleine. Unfortunately the larger slice of the public- the gullible- fell for it hook line and dinker.They were looking for something like that for their little crusade. they only had to pay around 80p at the newsagent's to get it.
DeleteLet's start seeing the proof of all these withhelds . Then let's start to examine why so many police officers and so many different forces made so many special unprecedented arrangements to seemingly placate G M ...
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteOscar Slater19 March 2019 at 13:12
Delete''Better just to accept that Gerry and his pals are pretty much a bunch of plonkers than to go seeing things that aren't there''
To be fair, the only evidence of 'plonkerism' was carried out by Payne who was talking a bit lewdly after some wine.The statement doesn't tell of anyone else saying a word - including GM.The real plonker was Gaspar herself. She never mentioned once that Madeleine's name was mentioned by anyone,drunk or sober. She heard one statement and saw one gesture .She invented the rest in her haze.Naturally, as Madeleine had worn her mum's makeup, the internet detective agency decided that it was a Lolita case.The same agency that disregards the need for evidence for anything. Yet, when reminded of these bizarre methods of crime busting, they kick and scream and call everyone else a conspiracy theorist or McCann member or circle. But we expect nothing more of that great 'court of public opinion'. They represent the world- and that's a place in great shape.
'Ros will assure us...….', there you again telling my readers what I would say. How about I just stop writing my blog and you can fill it will everything you think I might have said?
DeleteFor those unfamiliar with what 13:37 is trying to say, let me clarify. He is referring to the £1,000 contribution from the Met police to Goncalo Amaral's legal fund. He is trying to say it is a myth, that it didn't happen and that it is part of the antis propaganda campaign.
Further he refers to 'mythical comraderie', the idea that police officers should feel any sort of affinity with brother officers who are not British. To support GA is to support his theory, so the donation story was a lie.
Except it wasn't. The money was very real and the accompanying note anonymous for obvious reasons. It doesn't take much to imagine that those met policers who contributed were thinking there but for the grace of God, go I. It is unheard of for former suspects to sue (for cash), the police officer who investigated them. How do you think this makes current officers who are investigating them, feel?
Overall, you want us to think the British police and the parents are on one side, and the Portuguese police are on another. I was going to dismiss that instantly, but you have caught me in a wavering mood, perhaps your suggestion is not as outlandish as it appears.
There is however no sound reason to suggest the Met police donation to GA's is a myth, you are planting another lie, very clumsily, and so easily disproved, as I said before why do you do it?
Thanks 14:32, pretty much the way I see it. I find it comical that a bunch of blokes, who probably have no children themselves, think that mums playing with their little girls is preparing them for the advances of a paedophile.
DeleteGoodness knows what they'd make of some of the outfits the likes of M&S and Primark sell with sizes from age 4 up.
I think they are crass and inappropriate, but it doesn't make the people who put them on their kids paedophiles.
And, 14:32, if you have seen Gerry parading round PDL in his £8.99 three quarter length shorts, with matching polo shirt (no doubt acquired at the Portimao branch of Primark) how can exonerate him of plonkerism?
DeleteYou'd think a man of his standing would at least have gone to the likes of Springfield, or Bull and Bear. You can take the schemie out of the scheme, but you can't take the scheme out of the schemie (as they say here in Scotland).
''Overall, you want us to think the British police and the parents are on one side, and the Portuguese police are on another. I was going to dismiss that instantly, but you have caught me in a wavering mood, perhaps your suggestion is not as outlandish as it appears.''
DeleteI hope you don't take this personally, it's only advice. Before you presume you can read the mind of anyone else, master how your own moves.
I don't believe anyone is on the McCanns side. be it British or Portuguese. I have never said otherwise. I believe the parents are pawns in the game and the appearance of their protection doesn't fool me.
''There is however no sound reason to suggest the Met police donation to GA's is a myth, you are planting another lie, very clumsily, and so easily disproved, as I said before why do you do it?''
Because i believe the support is only implied. It's part of the sham. The much maligned Amaral and his dedication and determination to get justice for a little girl ? The PJ and their 'brothers in arms' who donated cash, haven't chased a single theory he had. That wpuld have been a more meaningful gesture.If they did they led nowhere. But being led to believe their brotherhood is real sells the illusion of them all being of one mind and on the one side.I don't buy it. They have never looked like a tandem act.The results - or lack of - all support this.You can call me a liar. It doesn't matter. You call anyone who doesn't wish bad on the parents a liar- or worse depending on how the day's going for you.But you rarely explain the lies you promote.When asked why what you call lies are lies you can't. When I ask you to support your opinions you claim are facts, you can't. I would ask you why you do it.But it's obvious to anyone who reads what you want.
Oscar Slater 19 March 2019 at 13:12
DeleteWell said, Oscar. I concur.
Moreover, the Gaspars, having witnessed such a seemingly inappropriate exchange, and despite their apprehension, continued letting David Payne bathe their little girl.
UN BE LIE VA BLE!
Regards.
Pooh of Montepoo
I think much the same as yourself Oscar with regard to the Gaspar. I cringed at Jane Tanners's example of their bawdy humour, when she mentioned she had to go and relieve Russ.
DeleteAs educated as the group might be, their limited social circle renders them a tad naïve, hence their idea of humour is rather juvenile. I tend to think Mrs Gaspar feared she might have seen something extremely creepy that she thought the police should know. It's unlikely she went to any great lengths to find other explanations for David Payne's odd comments and creepy gestures.
On the whole 'paedophile' debate, surely paedophiles have to at least be in the same room as the child. None of these parents was volunteering to stay home with the kids. During the days they were nannies to whom they could have told everything, and at night they were on their own.
Unfortunately, simple facts like none of the adults wanting to be alone with the kids, doesn't stand in the way of lunatics like Bennett and Hall, they are determined to stamp perverted sex all over it. Their theories come from their own bizarre imaginations (same applies to creepy guitar player). They are imagining things the rest of us wouldn't think of in a million years - Lolita ffs! And the reason we think of them is because they never happen. Look at Bennett. Does anyone believe he has any sort of expertise on what goes on in bedrooms, aeroplane toilets or the back seats of cars? Has he in his adult life, or even childhood, been asked to partake in a local orgy or stand naked in a forest for a human sacrifice. Has he ever been stalked by gay men eager to recruit him to their weekly meeting of the Whip and Fetish Club? Does he wear a #MeToo badge?
Now I have led far from a sheltered life and I have lived in many places both posh and sink estate. As a freelance legal secretary in London, I mixed with all social classes. And, aw shucks this is no time for modesty, I was very attractive. Yet never in my adult life have I known, or even met anyone into the kind of perversity as discussed regularly on the Havern site and some Facebook pages.
The Tapas group behaved like any parents of young children desperately in need of a break from said young children. I loved my kids to smithereens but I longed for nights or even days off. The best I could do was hide in the bathroom for a couple of hours with Madam Butterfly blaring out. And before anyone starts saying that's no different to dining in your own garden, yes it is. I was there in the house and available for any emergency. I will be honest, there were many nights when I literally wept because I couldn't go out with my mates. I do understand the Tapas group's need for adult time but their irresponsible way of doing it was appalling. As a young mum I literally could not enjoy myself while out if I was not 100% sure my kids were safe, I would phone home several times, and in those days it was via payphones in noisy bars. Did I feel guilty? No, not really, I had a motto: Happy mum equals happy child.
Oscar Slater19 March 2019 at 15:13
Delete''And, 14:32, if you have seen Gerry parading round PDL in his £8.99 three quarter length shorts, with matching polo shirt (no doubt acquired at the Portimao branch of Primark) how can exonerate him of plonkerism?''
Is there a correlation between cheap shorts and murder though.But his plonker house took some earning it has to be said..
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton19 March 2019 at 17:04
Delete''I tend to think Mrs Gaspar feared she might have seen something extremely creepy that she thought the police should know.''
Like what ? Two men, 40ish were having a meal and a drink and wee talking about sex. One made a gesture with his hand . Yeah ok. Is that illegal ?If she heard them mention a child of 3 years of age and with a name then it's worth looking at.But she added that herself. That makes he a bit mad, very drunk or dishonest.
'' It's unlikely she went to any great lengths to find other explanations for David Payne's odd comments and creepy gestures.'
Exactly.
''And, aw shucks this is no time for modesty, I was very attractive. Yet never in my adult life have I known, or even met anyone into the kind of perversity as discussed regularly on the Havern site and some Facebook pages. ''
I wasn't there but I'm prepared to guess that you mixed with adults who liked to have a drink and a laugh and to socialise.That's how mixing works. But, somewhere else, behind closed doors, others with a common unpleasant hobby were mixing and socialising too. Like kicks around with like. Paedophilia isn't a class thing. It's an interest that doesn't care about class.Bennett etc have been influenced by all the Lolita crap due mainly to this happening in 2007. it was around that time a lot of that shit was being exposed online. Since then, Savile / Freud etc has happened.They took a missing little girl in make up and chose it as the headline maker. Sick but true.
The parents and tapas parents are guilty of gambling with their children's safety and taking it for granted. The McCanns lost. No coincidence that they were next to the road.That apartment was the short straw. easy in; easy out; easy gone.
It's a well established fact in criminology that murderers are more likely to shop at Primark. There it is.
DeleteI think his house looks quite nice, but he really needs to do something with the driveway. Looks a bit Costco to me.
He wears a fine sandal. Live with it.
DeleteJeepers, the dogs must be a real worry for some. Why such a massive effort to discount their evidence. (Yes, I know it isn't enough evidence in a court of law, but it is in the court of public opinion.)
ReplyDeleteIt appears that there is DNA from the car, and it cannot be ruled out that it is Madeleine's. The only way to do that is for DNA testing to advance.
That's where we are at - the parents have not been totally excluded from suspicion.
''Jeepers, the dogs must be a real worry for some. Why such a massive effort to discount their evidence. (Yes, I know it isn't enough evidence in a court of law, but it is in the court of public opinion.)''
DeleteIs that were the trial will be held once the parents have been arrested ? I recall a similar case. A trial held in the court of public opinion. Lindy Chamberlain 1990. Found guilty of murdering her baby after claiming a dingo ran away with the baby in it's mouth. The public in Australia were enraged as was the rest of the world. Tee shirts and poster sales wee through the roof '' the dingo is innocent'. They loved the hilarity of their little catch phrase.She went to prison and much beer swigging ensued as the court of public opinion congratulated themselves on a job well done. They couldn't be found a few years later when the child's remains and clothes were discovered in a dingo's den.
The DNA has sat for 12 years. That speaks volumes. Those gunning for the two doctors and their fairy tail ending are wishing for a magical dust to be thrown over the DNA and it will all be over. It's a weak argument.In the case of Grimm versus Grime- who wins.
Look, there is what should be, and what is. You sound like a small time hood bragging that the police can't touch him because they don't have the evidence.
DeleteClearly you are not the type to care what others think of you. Or maybe you think you're really clever.
At the end of the day, we're not really talking about your morality here though, but what people think.
I suppose that's a result for a psychopath, and maybe even for you. Your work is done.
''You sound like a small time hood bragging that the police can't touch him because they don't have the evidence.''
DeleteYour fantasies are of no interest to me.But being unable to charge someone because no evidence exists is a reality. Even if they're charged, they'd find it easy to defend in court - no evidence.
''Clearly you are not the type to care what others think of you. Or maybe you think you're really clever. ''
Clearly you're guessing. Who knows why.And you're right, I'm only concerned with my own opinion of myself. I have high standards so it's a good system.
''At the end of the day, we're not really talking about your morality here though, but what people think.''
Nobody mentioned my morality.Why were you contemplating it ?What people think ? You mean their opinions ? That's fine. But they have to realise they're only opinions. Telling people with alternative opinions that they're facts and that it's alternative opinions that are wrong because 'i say so' is stupid. It's also desperate.
''I suppose that's a result for a psychopath, and maybe even for you. Your work is done.''
It's a result for those who chant mantras and follow each other around like sheep.So a hollow victory.They enjoy it among themselves. It's not a result for those who like to consider facts and evidence and take a broader view of a crime that has evaded definition for 12 years.It's a defeat for debate.
I mentioned your morality
DeleteOtherwise, thank you so much for proving me right.
Thank you for taking the time to imagine it. It's a bit weird for my tastes, but live and let live i suppose.Glad i proved you right in your mind too. I aim to please.I permit you to reward yourself for such sagacity. When the bell rings, have a toffee.
DeleteIf I may interject here 19:42, what is 'there's nooooo evidence' if not a chant or mantra? Or is it that old Goebbels trick of repeating a lie often enough to become the truth?
DeleteIn any event, it's the wrong answer to 'did you kill your child' or 'did you hide your child' or any other question relating to the Madeleine's disappearance. For the reference the correct answer is 'No I f*cking didn't and here's why...….'. 'There's noooo evidence' is more of a taunt and might account for the determination of the police, both British and Portuguese to bring the case to resolution.
Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton19 March 2019 at 22:17
Delete'' If I may interject here 19:42, what is 'there's nooooo evidence' if not a chant or mantra? Or is it that old Goebbels trick of repeating a lie often enough to become the truth?''
I never said 'noooooo evidence' I just said there wasn't any that could bring an arrest, let alone a charge. If that's a lie then tell me how.When I closed with my reference to those who chant mantras i wasn't pointing to this one alone. There's plenty' the dogs don't lie; the 48 questions; Gaspar;The car;Amaral'thruth of the lie. The list goes on ( and on).
''In any event, it's the wrong answer to 'did you kill your child' or 'did you hide your child' or any other question relating to the Madeleine's disappearance. For the reference the correct answer is 'No I f*cking didn't and here's why...….'. ''
I imagine you're right. If I was in that position I'd go a bit mental .But If a McCann ever loses their grip during an interview / interrogation it's deemed further evidence that he / she is a maniac and that there was blood everywhere.But who are you referring to as the questioner ? Amaral ? Sandra ? I'm not clear. But I think GM said on camera ' No'. Unfortunately, he then said 'that's an emphatic no' thus unwittingly giving life to another future antis meme.It wasn't taken as him saying it was a definite unequivocal no or that he was stating it categorically, which would be implied in normal circumstances. No( emphatic), it was sent to Peter Hyatt, the Bible bashing pseudo psychologist with a penchant for tambourines and guitars. And then another meme was born with the now famous 'embedded confession' study.
I hope you're right about the police taking the fact as a taunt or a slight. If that's what it takes to get arses moving, then it's OK by me.
22.47; you also forgot; there was no evidence of jemmied shutters. there was no evidence of whooshing curtains. there was evidence of an open window; Kate Healy McCann's palm print. Oh and last but not least, the was No evidence of an abduction.
DeleteAnonymous @19.3, 15:11
DeleteIf you're going to assume the moral high ground at every opportunity you should at least get your facts straight.
The Chamberlain case did NOT arise in 1990.
The baby's remains were NOT discovered.
Clothing (a bloodied jumpsuit) was NOT found 'in a dingo's den' (nor even 'half buried' in one, as the Daily Mail had people believe. Was that your source perhaps?)
The bloodied jumpsuit was found a week after the child's disappearance, NOT discovered years later, although a separate item of clothing (a knitted jacket) was. But again, not half-buried in a dingo's den.
When the jemmied shutters was mentioned, it was an imagined scenario offered up by the McCanns. If somebody breaks into your home( or holiday apt) you look for how they must have gotten in. If there are no locks broken and no doors and windows open you assume two things ; they forced their way in a different way.In this case they said it was probably the window.Not being career criminals they agreed they must have been jemmied open.They didn't go on record as saying they had been jemmied open. They said they 'must have been'. A guess in other words.And a guess can be right or completely wrong. I know that's an abstract concept to an anti but it's a fact.If Kate had seen curtains whooshing, why would they still be whooshing for the police later ? it's like saying she saw a weird looking man on the corner but because he'd gone when the police arrived , he mustn't have been there in the first place.
DeleteIf I forced my way into your home while you were out, via a window, the police wouldn't find any evidence of me.They may see evidence of a break in if i was careless, but i doubt it.I'd close anything i'd opened and leave no breakage.And I'd wear gloves.The only hand prints they'd find would be yours or someone else's who lives there. It would be odd if they found no traces of you. If anything they'd assume you'd cleaned it up. We all have our fingerprints and hand prints all over where we live. So would your neighbours all start gossiping about how you 'staged' a burglary ?
If you leave three sleeping children at home alone and you go home and one;s gone. What would you think ? You'd think she'd wandered off. You'd check with neighbours and look around the street.If it wasn't your home but a holiday apartment in a foreign country what then ? Given that all the children of a group were left each evening and that their movements could be predicted, the possibility of a predator with local knowledge of the area would be able to strike. Of all the group the most vulnerable would be the couple next to the pavement and road and car park.That would be, in this case, the McCanns. Again, why leave clues. It defeats the object of planning and executing a crime.But, it ruins the internet detectives great sleuthing doesn't it.At the end of the day, Gerry's eyes are too close together and Kate was reportedly 'feisty'. Who needs forensics..
"Clothing (a bloodied jumpsuit) was NOT found 'in a dingo's den' (nor even 'half buried' in one, as the Daily Mail had people believe. Was that your source perhaps?)
DeleteThe bloodied jumpsuit was found a week after the child's disappearance, NOT discovered years later, although a separate item of clothing (a knitted jacket) was. But again, not half-buried in a dingo's den."
Lindy Chamberlain was released from prison in 1986 days after a hiker found her daughter’s matinee jacket partially buried adjacent to a dingo lair in an isolated location near where the family had camped.
And Lindy Chamberlain was innocent.The public said she wasn't. The public wanted vengeance. The public got it. But the public were wrong all along. With or without their catchphrase.There's a moral to the story.
DeleteAnonymous20 March 2019 at 12:49
Delete''If you're going to assume the moral high ground at every opportunity you should at least get your facts straight.''
I cited a case that resulted in the wrongful conviction of a mother for killing her baby girl. The public were in uproar and wanted to see her suffer for the crime but she swore she was innocent. The public got what they wanted-even without the evidence appearing in court. She was later released and it was overturned.That's relevant to this case regarding public attitude and opinion. If you call that the moral high ground you need to wake up or calm down.
Lindy was convicted in 1982. Yes. She had appeals in 1986 rejected. Yes. Her and her husband were pardoned in 1987. Yes.Their convictions were quashed by a supreme court in 1988. Yes.In 1992 the Government awarded her and her husband over a million dollars compensation.In 2012 a fourth inquest ruled that the baby had died as a result of 'being attacked and taken by a dingo' Yes ?
In the initial inquest blood spray was located on the wall of their tent. So were dingo hairs.But the prosecution asserted the had 'staged' a dingo attack and the parents knew there were dingoes in the area. The jury was instructed to remember that.That was on top of the public hysteria they were supposed to 'forget about'.
The matinee jacket belong to the baby was found buried near a dingo lair. This jacket didn't exist according to the police initially investigating it.Because they couldn't see it, they decided it didn't exist.A bit like a' whee's the evidence of the abduction'' scenario
There are parallels between that case and the McCann case. Particularly between the police investigations and the court of public opinion deciding who had done what and how evil they were- just trusting their 'gut instinct'( suspicious mind).
You can ignore them of course. It's an example of how jumping to conclusions without evidence or training is dangerous and often useless.It's an example of why police forces were introduced to society in the first place.Ignoring something doesn't stop it existing.Like closing your eyes doesn't make the bogey man disappear..
For anyone interested in the parallels in the case, the question of evidence( valid or not ?) and the investigation and public anger, this may be of interest...
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lindy_Chamberlain-Creighton
@ Anonymous20 March 2019 at 12:49
DeleteHello there. You're a bit excitable aren't you. Bless.
I don't think the pertinent points of the Chamberlain case as posted here was to discuss dates was it. The obvious gist of the post was to highlight the danger, or foolishness, of allowing an enraged public to take over a tragic case and to jump to conclusions.It stressed the need, I would suggest, for collating evidence if a prosecution is going to take place in a criminal court.That Lindy Chamberlain was later exonerated wold confirm this.
If you were to look at the conclusions of the different inquests, and the reviews of what was deemed evidence by mistake, or evidence that wasn't detected, you'd see the relevance of this story.And, as the poster suggests, it has a moral to it. Far too much was asked of a jury of ordinary members of the public, considering the sparsity of actual physical evidence.
13:14 there is nothing inconclusive about the dogs alert. They bark or point when they detect the scent they are looking for.
ReplyDeleteWhat is inconclusive is that further evidence is required to establish who's scent they have alerted to.
So much work to discredit the dogs, all based on semantics. Who are you trying to convince, us or yourself?
''So much work to discredit the dogs, all based on semantics. Who are you trying to convince, us or yourself?''
ReplyDeleteI'm repeating Grime's conclusions. Who was he trying to convince ?
''So much work to discredit the dogs, all based on semantics.''
ReplyDeleteIf it was only semantics that discredited the dogs we'd have seen them discussed in a court of law.
Yeah, but people still know what they think. Who cares if that pair ever go on trial?
DeleteThey wanted to be loved, and now they are not.
Oscar Slater19 March 2019 at 18:06
Delete''Yeah, but people still know what they think. Who cares if that pair ever go on trial?
They wanted to be loved, and now they are not.''
What a lovely attitude. A great example of a non-thinking perspective from a representative of a hate group. It's short and to the point. It would make a fine tee shirt or poster. I hope it catches on. Be nice to be able to sot these people before they approach too close.
I'm not a representative of any group, just an observer of human behaviour.
DeleteYou seem to be making your attacks more personal. Help me out, I don't really know how this game works, am I supposed to do or say something?
You may well be an observer of human behaviour. Or you may just be someone who watches people and events and jumps to conclusions. Big difference.
DeleteIf you think you've observed human behaviour by watching news clips and televised interviews you're wrong.If you think you've observed it by reading about what people do or have done,, you're wrong.They are just exercises in superficial observations leading to superficial conclusions.Nothing of any value or significance but plenty of guesswork that can be altered or modified later in your own mind.
I wasn't saying you literally represent a group. After all, the groups aren't actual officially recognised. They are just for and against.What you said was typical of the against ; the antis.The 'who cares' was the attitude they share ; the 'wanted to be loved' is the antis mind readers slogan. based on 'observing' them, naturally.
I'm not sure what 'game' you're referring to.But I'm confident that you say and do whatever you feel like on here. You don't need instructions.
Yes, I see what you mean.
DeleteO.G. were digging for a body in close proximity to 5A.
ReplyDeleteThe body must have been buried before the circus commenced on Fri 4th May
For there to be Madeleines DNA in the hire car she must have been dug up in the full glare of the media and police circus in PDL and placed in the car many days later.
Either the digs are false flags or the dogs alerts to the hire car are. Take your pick.
British policing at its finest!
I'm imagining the dastardly Tapas Band. They've done the deed and now they have to get rid. They realise that they're in a foreign country. They don't know the best places or the nooks and crannies.
ReplyDeleteGM '' What do we do ??''
Tap1 : '' well wait a few nights..then, as the pubs are empytying walk around with the body til you find a hole''
Tap : '' Noooo...someone might recognise him 80%''
GM: '' come on I'm in a hurry. I have to create a dodgy fund in the morning''
'' Tap 4 : '' I gottit. Just bury her close to the appartment ''
GM : ''Why ?''
Tap 4 :'' It's hidden in plain sight''
GM : ''what's that mean ?''
Tap 4: ''I dunno but loadsa people say it on the internet''
GM : '' Ok..but won't the police look in the immediate vicinity first''
Tap 6 : '' Naaaa...they'd look all the other places or in the chapel''
Not likely really.
By the way 19:32, I'm pretty skilled in spotting Borderline Personality Disorder.
ReplyDeleteWell, Oz, you wouldn't need to look far would you :)
Delete@21:00
DeleteBlimey, Oscar man, I’m just a bear. You say cadaverine, I say no no no. Should I be worried about my personality?
Pooh
You have the freedom to agree with him or be dragged screaming into Room 101, Winston.There, you will be indoctrinated using combination of classical conditioning and intermittent ECT sessions.If that doesn't cure your BPD I know a man who knows a man . Great power awaits. We're moving you up. You'll also receive a free meal voucher you can use in your local Burger King before June 12th.
DeleteEric
It's all about you isn't it Pooh. Lol
DeleteAnonymous20 March 2019 at 00:15
DeleteThank you, Dr ricE, for the exquisite excursion into the folds of fantasy. I’m much obliged for your continued patronage. On receipt of the BK vouchers, I’ll endorse them to C Robin if the Signet Committee wouldn’t mind, I’m a vegetarian, remember? I love love, love, loving and honey in all its transfigurations.
The anticipation of the unearthly pleasures I would likely experience in Room 101 would finish me off on the spot, my love-filled loving heart would stop biting the bit of love and loving, my prized body would start decaying, cadaverine (a fine diamine) and several other interesting chemical compounds would start being produced and some molecules thereof would set themselves free. To cut the story short, it would be a gas! And I could howl at the morning driving rain no more.
But worst of all.. When Eddie would visit, he wouldn’t be able to find my remains and the leftovers of fine loving, for he hadn’t been trained to find the scent (those aforementioned free molecules) of a decomposing vertebrate, obviously a bear in my case, other than human. That’s why I say ‘no no no’ when I hear ‘cadaverine’.
But being a doctor, comrade ricE, you know all that. And if I’m wrong, you’ll put me right. I’ll reciprocate in kind.
Yours
Winston Winsome Bear, The Count of Montepoo
BTW, the seminal novel seems to have been ‘We’ by Yevgeny Zamyatin (Russ. ‘Мы’, Евге́ний Замя́тин)
Also for your kind attention, in case you’ve missed it: https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/11/20/ive-enough-george-orwell/
Ciao
Oscar Slater 21 March 2019 at 08:56
DeleteOz sayz it ;coz I is black? Anyways, it’s all about animals, honey, love and loving, honey. And commas.
Peace.
Pooh of Montepoo
Anonymous21 March 2019 at 13:34
Delete''Thank you, Dr ricE, for the exquisite excursion into the folds of fantasy. I’m much obliged for your continued patronage. On receipt of the BK vouchers, I’ll endorse them to C Robin if the Signet Committee''
Who'll love Aladdin Sane ?
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, old fruit.But the honourable Winns wolud know it's 'Cygnet Committee'.
( nice comma work, Pooh)
DeleteLol
Delete@13:18
DeleteHaving straggled through the Chemistry Forest, Pooh of little brain failed to spell correctly the most important word of his post. Bad, bad Pooh!
We all beg your pardon, Doctor.
Winns.
Oscar Slater 21 March 2019 at 15:55
DeleteWhat or who is Lol, Oscar man? Are you trying to intimidate me?
No to cadaverine?
Pooh.
@14:20
Delete‘Tell me who you friends are etc.’
Pooh
I'm far too good looking to have friends, Pooh.You should know that.
DeleteAnonymous21 March 2019 at 19:23
Delete''@13:18
Having straggled through the Chemistry Forest, Pooh of little brain failed to spell correctly the most important word of his post. Bad, bad Pooh!''
Pooh.Dear dear Pooh.Who the divvil is 13 :18 ?
That time made no appearance here. This isn't the first time I've caught you tampering with the natural order of the universe.Consider this a written warning.Now get back in the kitchen. I'm thirsty .
Anonymous 21 March 2019 at 14:18, 23:55
DeleteDon’t you worry, Laddy
Unwashed and somewhat slightly dazed
And partial to an occasional dream,
I scream when I’m asleep,
Wide-eyed in haze when I’m awake.
,
But God knows I'm Good.
Athirst for my honey? Smell my bear beer, dear.
W
You're so swishy in your satin and tat...
DeleteIn your frock coat and bipperty- bopperty hat...
Oh God I could do better than that....
I'm in your way, and I'll steal every moment..
If this trade is a curse, then I'll bless you
And turn to crossroads and hamburgers
( I'm having so much fun with the poisonous people
Spreading rumors and lies and stories they made up
Some make you sing and some make you scream
One makes you wish that you'd never been seen...)
Need I say more W old sausage...pour me another glass of inspiration.Have one yourself.I have sammiches and cigars..
The Sultan Of Sawdust..
What is this darkest of alchemies you speak of, Winsome, old fruit ?Let's not speak of gas and dogs or things we can't undo.You're always like this when you lose at the Bingo.I wish you'd go back to your old bad habits. They removed the ankle bracelet remember. You can cross borders now.Even the one that divides you and sanity.Go forth Winsome.Show them you can't be defeated again.Wear your off-the-shoulder number.See them bedazzled.Mention my name...
DeleteDr ricE
Wigan Pier
badda bing
Martin Grime, of the lowest rank in the British Police, brings his dogs to PDL. They do as trained and raise suspicions against individuals.
ReplyDeleteDo said individuals panic, no. They are very proactive and they ring their tame Detective Chief Superintendent Small of Leics Police.
He informs them that the dogs are only indicators there is nothing to worry about and the PJ would get a shock over the dogs findings.
How did DCS Bob know all of this?
Why did DCS Bob think it appropriate to discuss with suspects?
Was this enough reassurance for Gerry?
No, of course it wasn't.
The next day he rang Ken Jones, Chief Constable and Head of ACPO, who off the record informed him of the current state of the investigation and not to worry about the dogs.
Gerry is methodically trained and leaving nothing to chance, he rang the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire Police, the highest ranking officer in South Yorkshire, as opposed to Grime's status, to discuss Eddie and Keela's findings off the record.
No further weight was added to the dogs findings and they became a passing point of interest on the internet but for 12 years dismissed by official Police sources, it would be too embarrassing otherwise.
British Policing at its best.
No of cours it wsn't
So are you suggesting that the dogs indicated and it was a surprise or nuiscance for the UK police ? They must have been confident that they wouldn't indicate anything ? So, once they had, Gerry started calling policemen rather than his legal team .
ReplyDeleteGiven that the indicators were potentially incriminating and could, potentially, bring in suspects and a possible solution to the mystery, why would these policemen panic ? It wasn't incriminating them was it. If Gerry or Kate panicked then the reason would be obvious. It would also suggest guilt if they panicked. But in your theory they were cool, calm and calculated enough to make calls to the police and it was the police who jumped to kill the validity of any incriminating evidence. Why would they do that ? Why wold Gerry call a Yorkshire high ranking policeman and not Leicester or Scotland Yard ? To specifically get Grime to rearrange his conclusions ? Again, the question has to be why ?
The McCanns surely can't have that many police forces or politicians over a barrel . He can't have the kind of leverage that renders all of the powerful movers and shakers quaking. He's a cardiologist, not a politician.What possible consequences would these police forces and politicians have faced if either parent or both had faced charges ? Was GM working a hush hush programme sponsored by the government ? Or a pharma company ? Or had a death of a child been covered up for somebody important and he was aware of it ? Other than those two scenarios, which are both stretches, i see no possible power two doctors could wield against so many powerful people for so long.
Anon 20 Mar 13:36
DeleteI never said any policemen panicked I am just stating what is never liked in this case - verifiable facts.
It is not my theory that the McCanns rang Chief Police Officers, it is a matter of record.
Grime has given a statement under oath, Gerry contacted the Chief Constable of South Yorkshire (PJ files).
That the head of Leics CID danced to Gerry's tune is a matter of public record (PJ Files).
Gerry rang the Chief of Chief Constables, ACPO's Ken Jones (PJ Files).
Phone records available in PJ files
Ask yourself, how many suspects have Chief Constable's on speed dial.
These are question OG should be asking but all of the officers have been too junior in rank
For example Gamble held the rank of Assistant Chief Constable, who would investigate him, no one in OG for sure.
There has never been a conspiracy, just lying Policeman and Politicians ensuring nothing stuck to them and passing on the parcel.
This case has been tainted by corrupt UK Police Officers from day one, who has, or would investigate them.
''There has never been a conspiracy, just lying Policeman and Politicians ensuring nothing stuck to them and passing on the parcel...This case has been tainted by corrupt UK Police Officers from day one, who has, or would investigate them.''
DeleteConspiracy : the activity of secretly planning with other people to do something bad or illegal . A secret plan made by two or more people to do something bad, illegal, or against someone’s wishes. The action of plotting or conspiring.
You have actually suggested that the mechanics of it are a conspiracy. I agree. As for who has who on speed dial. Well, there has to be some parochial boys club somewhere that swear an oath of allegiance to each other. Where do high ranking politicians, royalty, doctors and businessmen congregate behind closed doors. I bet nobody ever saw any of the people you have named together in public prior to May 2007. So where and when had they made each other's acquaintance and exchange numbers. If what you claim is on record and in files, they would have to have met somewhere in the past privately. Or secretly. Then when someone needed to have strings pulled, the network sprung into action.Is there a better explanation of the governments involvement, military intelligence's involvement or the endless government sponsorship all clubbing together to get nowhere in the case ?
@14:40
ReplyDeleteAnd...?
Anon 20 March 13.36
ReplyDeleteWith regard to the sentence if your last paragraph -
"Was GM working a hush hush progrsmme sponsored by the government?"
I suggest you look into GM's involvement in COMARE, Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment - the study into radiation effect on kids near nuclear power stations.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
( think that may say a lot as to why the McCanns are being "protected".
Interesting. I have heard a whisper or two in recent years about that area. Nobody has told me of any stand outs as yet so I haven't been tempted to dig in that area so far. But I think it's time.
DeleteI have a mistrust of politicians, quangoes, pharmaceutical companies, mobile phone companies and the nuclear industry. Mainly because it would be naive to trust them or the creatures who run them. Holding this position runs the risk of coming up against latter day Oscar Wildes or general wags who make really funny 'tin foil hat' quips or mention conspiracy theorists as though talking about lepers.That's as well informed as they get and as deep as they go though. So I have no problem dismissing their input as worthless or pointless.
As I asked ( above ), what leverage could GM possibly have on so many powerful people.Yes, a cardiologist is an admirable profession but not one that places you beyond the law.So for Prime Ministers to move mountains and afford them professional media controllers like Dodd and Mitchell along with MI5, it makes you think.Imagining that those people were involved makes yu a mad conspiracy theorist.But it really happened.That just leaves the conspiracy doesn't it.So that leads to an inevitable question : why was a conspiracy needed to find a missing child ? It couldn't be could it. A conspiracy is intended to conceal or mislead. So that leads to why would so many need to conceal or mislead ? Time suggests it was so the truth of the crime will never be known outside of a certain circle.
I identify with the pros when i post.Not because I'm a pro, but because i's the lesser of two evils. I'm not a n anti.Not yet. I need much more than is on offer before that happens.
I have speculated that the McCanns have been in the dark in this case; that they've been pawns in someone else's game.I still rate that theory highly due to all of the above.But, what if they did cause the death of their child, albeit by accident and the called in favours.He must have been owed some huge favours-why ? Or, maybe, the child was held and ransomed and that ransom wasn't cash. The Gov have forked out 12 million on it all so it's not like the cash wasn't there. Maybe it was all to do with information.Knowledge is power, after all. So, maybe the Gov knew for a time or even now that Madeleine was OK. But by protecting the parents from blame they were protecting themselves from the real truth emerging from the source of the committed crime.
It explains all the darker areas of high ranking people showing an unprecedented forensic interest on how the public think and how the parents appear to that public.
Useless as our government are, could anybody make a bigger arse of covering the crime up than they have?
DeleteLots of people. That's how they end up in prison. We don't know for sure which crime has been covered up yet. An abduction or a death. Given the size of the apartment and even the place in which it happened it should have been an easy crime to solve.But it now carries the label of 'crime of the century' and so on. All that's been left are arguments and theories about Madeleine's fate, the culprit/s and the theories about the obvious suspects and their motives and their so called cunning plans. Nobody who suspects the parents strongly sees the relevance in talking about the unprecedented amount of help they received from the government or why the government are still willing to keep the case open with funding or why they'd be prepared to bend over backwards to cover anything up at all if it's only a mere police matter. Amaral went closest in stating he thought the forensics had been tampered with, MI5 had tampered with the investigation and the political will of two countries are preventing the crime being solved. We need more flesh on those bones.
Deleteoh dear 22.24. you really are attempting to head this blog in the wrong direction. Naughty!
DeleteA catholic NHS research cardiologist and his scrawny, part-time GP wife with mutual interests in the 'lifestyle' couldn't ever blackmail HMG.
I suggest you stop looking into your cups and get back to the grand game of querying all facts, denying the evidence in the PJ files, shouting down any questions regarding the abduction myth and carry-on spinning the McCann line;just as your masters ordered. Bit of a sad existence this isn't it?
@Oscar Slater 08:52
DeleteHardly. They're making just as big a one over Brexit.
11:58, thank you. I acknowledge the unprecedented amount of help they received from the government. Is it possible that this was in response to a news story that grabbed the public imagination, thanks to the efforts of the McCanns?
DeletePoliticians often like to promote stories that deflect from other things they are doing. I got the impression the likes of Gordon Brown wanted to make himself look softer and more caring, but quickly got himself out once the true facts started to surface.
Personally, I think it is equally plausible that a whole bunch of people jumped on a bandwagon, and soon realised it was out of control.
There is a great flaw in many conspiracy theories in that they promote the concept of an infallible government. However, that is rarely the case.
12:24 Precisely. There is a great misperception that Governments are in control of things that happen. They tend to be more reactive.
Delete11:59 - what is the significance of him being a catholic, NHS research cardiologist. Is there some Opus Dei type operation circulating in the health service?
DeleteAnonymous21 March 2019 at 11:59
Delete''oh dear 22.24. you really are attempting to head this blog in the wrong direction. Naughty!''
I'm trying to open up discussion. It's locked in one narrow focus.All McCann blogs are.I think after 12 years of scrutinising every word and action of the parents with a view to incriminate them would have proven worthwhile years ago if it actually was worthwhile.But it's all people want to do even though it goes nowhere.It just allows people to get things out of their system.It's like a record that gor stuck ages ago and anyone trying to tun it off or play another one is perceived as a party wrecker. I'm sorry if you fear being taken in a direction other than one in which you can vent your spleen and feel better. Which direction wold you prefer ?
''A catholic NHS research cardiologist and his scrawny, part-time GP wife with mutual interests in the 'lifestyle' couldn't ever blackmail HMG. ''
Scrawny wife ? Ahh I see. That direction.
''I suggest you stop looking into your cups and get back to the grand game of querying all facts,''
It's all I ever do. I question everything and everyone.I'm not sure if you've read up lately, but 12 years of building a case composed of so many 'facts 'hasn't even brought an arrest from either of the two teams investigating the case.Any ideas of why that is ?
''denying the evidence in the PJ files, shouting down any questions regarding the abduction myth and carry-on spinning the McCann line;just as your masters ordered. Bit of a sad existence this isn't it?''
My idea of a sad existence is sitting reading things on the internet and imagining it's been composed by a mythical online slave obeying a master you invented in your ignorance-induced hallucinations.
So, all the answers lie in the PJ files do they. Are you suggesting that OG aren't aware of the files or just haven't read them ? Is the abduction recognised officially in these files as 'a myth' ? Or are you trying to spread disinformation to prop up a theory that's to weak to stand by itself ? What's the name of the officer who is calling it a myth ? Or are more than one saying it ? Or is it just conjecture by those who sit on line coming up with deep observations like how 'scrawny' KM is then telling others their existence is 'sad' ? Shills bore me. And as palter merchants go, you're doing them no favours either.
Oscar Slater21 March 2019 at 13:08
Delete''11:58, thank you. I acknowledge the unprecedented amount of help they received from the government. Is it possible that this was in response to a news story that grabbed the public imagination, thanks to the efforts of the McCanns?''
I see what you're saying and i considered that line too.I used to think that maybe Blair's conscience finally caught up with him. He was in the big chair for some iconic headlines ; Lady Di, Robin Cook ; David Kelly; Jill Dando;the illegal attack on Iraq. He may have seen a story to grab on to so he could make his exit shortly after and be remembered as the PM with heart and human touch.But we know he's an areshole.His tentacles spread to many places and people and still do.He's like an insidious plague.Brown was no better and still isn't, And Cameron hasn't even pretended to have a human heart.The illusion of two major parties being in opposition was finally exposed after Blair.In some ways, the way they mimicked each other over the Scottish Referendum or in the McCann case confirms that they eat from the same trough.Interesting that the first thing Blair did on leaving number 10 was fly to Rome to convert.
I think that it became a political powder keg fast.And that's not right in a missing person case. Even if a PM was looking for Brownie points ( no pun intended) he wouldn't have needed to call on Military Intelligence.I can think of to cases since the McCann case that the PM could have intervened in.Cameron especially in the back packer slaughter in Koh Tao.
''Personally, I think it is equally plausible that a whole bunch of people jumped on a bandwagon, and soon realised it was out of control.''
I think that accounts for the celebrities. Branson has always chased Prime Ministers and cameras. Beckham is wheeled willingly into any spotlight and JK Rowling is the same. Though JK Rowling wrote the worlds most famous Wizard book series and the anti McCann crowd saw it as another 'obvious' clue to the 'ritual' behaviour of the satanic Tapas group.
''There is a great flaw in many conspiracy theories in that they promote the concept of an infallible government. However, that is rarely the case.''
They're all aresholes. It's a pre-requisite to the job. The ones I promote are intended to illustrate that their cynical and obvious dishonesty works so easily because those who suffer from ideal world syndrome refuse to believe that they are anything but experts,honest, and trustworthy.An honest reading of a lot of conspiracy theories highlight that the official line is the 'batshit crazy' one.
Cardiologists in UK are CoE, Catholic, Muslim, Hindu.Etc.They work in hospitals not churches
DeleteThanks 14:05, I hadn't realised that about JK Rowling, by the way.
DeleteThanks also for the perspective on "bat shit crazy". You are absolutely right, you'd have to be detainable to accept the official line on this case.
I think it's a desperate attempt to prove my own sanity that keeps me interested.
As you say; the McCann's are like national treasures.
ReplyDeleteIt must be fun for the duo to still be duping the world with such faux honesty while secretly turning over in their minds the exact location of the bones of their dead daughter.
If anybody still believes the two Rothley doctors are, or were, ever looking, please go ahead and donate to their "Find Madeleine Fund", "leave no stone unturned".
A more macabre title could not have been invented.
Go to their website, select your donation, and press the button.
There, - that was easy.
jc
What the hell is wrong with you, man.It doesn't matter how diverse the subjects are on this blog you post the same thing on every one.The fund's a sham, the child's dead.You just ty to find a new way of saying it.And still it's only your opinion.That's why you have never - ever - cited a credible source.
Delete''It must be fun for the duo to still be duping the world with such faux honesty while secretly turning over in their minds the exact location of the bones of their dead daughter''
ReplyDeleteInstead of talking nonsense about a fund, why don't you give us a source that tells the world Madeleine is now dead, that her bones are lying somewhere and how the parents know this? If it's that obvious, it should be easy.Even for you.
11:51 You dirty coppers can't pin anything on me, see!
DeleteDogs alerted to the scent of cadaverine and blood in the apartment the child was last seen in. That does not prove Madeleine died there, but it does prove that someone died there.
The dogs also alerted to the scent of cadaverine in the McCann's villa, and in their hire car, and on the child's favourite toy. The one her mother washed before carrying it everywhere with her.
Thank you for the chance to repeat this information.
No problem. Antis who don't repeat themselves ad nauseam or as rare as Unicorn droppings. Rather like the sources they supply when asked.
DeleteIf you actually do look for the source, all you'll find is nothing saying the child is dead.Dog alerts ? If they mean anything close to what you're trying to suggest they wouldn't have been sat in storage for twelve years and Grime would have been fired for incompetency or perjury.
I will repeat this information. If Madeleine's DNA was in the hire car, the body must have been disinterred and then replaced within the vicinity of 5a.
DeleteYou surely cannot believe OG were digging holes in PDL on the off chance of finding something.
Either the dog alerts are false, or the digging of holes was a sham and a show.
Take your pick.
''Thank you for the chance to repeat this information.''
DeleteYou say that quite a lot Oz. It's childish.
@ Oscar Slater21 March 2019 at 13:12
Delete"Dogs alerted to the scent of cadaverine and blood in the apartment the child was last seen in. That does not prove Madeleine died there, but it does prove that someone died there."
No it doesn't.
----------------------------------------------------
"The dogs also alerted to the scent of cadaverine in the McCann's villa"
Did someone die there too?
---------------------------------------------
"and in their hire car"
Did someone die in the car too?
------------------------------------
Your assumptions are wrong and totally different to what Grime reported in his official statement.
You are spreading misinformation.
Oh dear, back to Grime's original statement. Who's repeating themselves now?
DeleteHe's just another palter merchant
DeleteOscar Slater21 March 2019 at 18:57
Delete''Oh dear, back to Grime's original statement. Who's repeating themselves now?''
I think he's trying to convince of a fact.Don't be nervous. He'll give up soon when he realises there's nobody home.
"Dogs alerted to the scent of cadaverine and blood in the apartment the child was last seen in. That does not prove Madeleine died there, but it does prove that someone died there."
ReplyDeleteThose same dogs alerted at Haut De La Garenne in Jersey too - but there are no records of anyone being killed there
14:26, I didn't realise child abusers kept records of the kids they killed.
Deletethe police do
DeleteNo one doubts that there was horrible abuse committed at the home, but despite initial fears that a number of children may have been killed, no evidence of missing children was found.
DeleteWhat did they alert to ?If the kids were dead and moved elsewhere maybe they alerted to that
DeleteNo records of any missing chidren
Deletenot like you to repeat yourself Oscar
ReplyDeleteRe Trial by jury in Portugal
ReplyDelete“At the request of the accused, a jury could be used in trials for major crimes.”
http://www.country-data.com/cgi-bin/query/r-11014.html
“Jury trials can be requested for criminal cases but are rare.”
https://www.state.gov/j/drl/rls/hrrpt/2006/78833.htm
Pooh
Not a trace of Madeleine was found in that apartment, alive or dead, if she died she died elsewhere. Remember Amaral saying he thought that they were 'chasing a ghost?' He should have listened to his instincts.
ReplyDeleteHis instincts told him she died in the apartment.
DeleteThe British police told him she died in the apartment, how trustworthy were they?
DeleteWhere's the trustworthy source to say the British police told him that ? Link ?
Delete