This time a guy wearing a surgical mask who climbed in the windows and beds of young British girls. Surgical mask man sounds much like Smelly Man, the ‘new lead’ 5 years or so back, who had the exact same modus operandi, but was noticeable by his stench. Surgical mask man by contrast, sounds like a germophobe. Two opposite ends of the hygiene scale, both with a penchant for small British girls on holiday in the Algarve.
At the time of that new lead, the smelly pervert who climbed in windows, Operation Grange called for restraint by the press, to protect the young British girls affected. I remember being a little cynical at the time, for example, I wondered how the world’s press, camped out in PDL and scratching around for stories in the summer of 2007, heard nothing whatsoever about Smelly Man or Surgical Mask Man? And nothing whatsoever about the 40 plus break ins that are being reported today, 12 years on.
The source for the latest story in the tabloids appears to be the Portuguese newspaper Correio da Manha, who claim the PJ have received more money to follow this new lead. I have no doubt the PJ have been given more money, but a new lead after all this time? It begs the question what have the PJ and OG being doing this past 7 years, just sitting around waiting for a new lead to come in? And given Portugal's very strict Judicial Secrecy laws, is it likely the PJ gave this tip off to the press? If the PJ were leaking, wouldn't they be leaking against the McCanns rather than for them?
Gerry and Kate would like to skip through the first two weeks of May, and who could blame them? Every 3rd May, they come under the spotlight of the world’s media, this year especially due to the Netflix documentary. And each year there is no sign of an abductor or an abduction, nothing to take the heat off them. It is becoming more and more difficult to prove that Madeleine was abducted.
The word 'abduction' these days is notable by it's absence, that is, it has been replaced by 'disappeared', it is no longer central to the Madeleine narrative. It is not difficult to understand that the parents, and indeed many others, want to keep the abduction scenario very much alive. Remove the abductor and what are you left with? So who has a vested interest in planting 'new leads' and new suspects in the media?
The police? On this occasion the PJ? Unlikely, unless they are trying to mislead the suspects. The abduction story was good for many, not just those who hotfooted it out to PDL, but for police agencies and national charities. the cherubic face of little Madeleine was much more sympathetic than the pimply faces of the surly teens they usually have to look for. And it was good for the tabloids, on a sales chart, threats to cherubic children outsell every other heinous crime. How about the politicians who backed Gerry and Kate unreservedly, Blair, Brown, Johnson, not to mention Harriet Harman, shamefully sitting alongside a hacked off Gerry. Yeah, let's change Freedom of Speech laws to protect this pair even further.
Meanwhile the tabloids and their feeders, continue to persuade the public that an abductor was responsible for Madeleine's disappearance and that the police are in no shape or form looking at her parents or their friends. In fact shape was a good word there, lol, the police are in fact looking for an elusive shapeshifter. Either that, or there were an inordinate number of weird predators wandering the streets of PDL that night looking for a child to steal.
Hi Rosalinda
ReplyDelete"but a new lead after all this time? It begs the question what have the PJ and OG being doing this past 7 years, just sitting around waiting for a new lead to come in?"
They should tell us all,shouldn't they? It won't hurt. Or perhaps it would?
Just my thoughts,
MSM in general and many documentaries in particular have in a hypnotic way, through their visualizations of the McCanns’ own fantasies, managed to keep the myth about the abduction alive.
Haven’t we seen and heard enough of imaginative potential paedophile monsters, like Surgical mask man or Smelly tobacco man,whom you mention Rosalinda, snatching Madeleine from her bed, none of whom has been seen by any witnesses, neither before nor after the disappearance of Madeleine?
It’s about time now that the Grange gave all the British taxpayers a full report on everything they’ve done since they began co-operating with the Portuguese PJ. I see no reason why they shouldn’t.
Any government, democratic or totalitarian can easily defend itself against suspicion of corruption or fraud by keeping official files secret from their people on the pretext that it’s for their “subjects” own good and for the sake of justice.
As for the Madeleine case, nothing whatsoever, after almost nine (9) years of alleged investigation, can justify the British authorities’ silence about it. Silence and secrecy are almost always dirty means used by people in power to protect their own privileges. I sometimes wonder if the Met/SY fear countermeasures from team McCann, if it would be publicly known that the McCanns are under investigation? If Grange cannot notify them, let alone the taxpayers, that the McCanns are still under investigation, this will never happen, I’m afraid. After more than 12 years of investigation, whereof 2 or 3 years under the McCanns’ own “management”, there cannot possibly exist any serious new lines of inquiry to pursue. Either there’re suspects or there aren’t, and people, not just the British citizens, are entitled to know! Don't you think so Rosalinda.
PS Don't give up your blog Rosalinda, as it's more needed now than ever, considering the threat against freedom of expression even in our democracies. The Assagne case and other cases are just as interesting as they're scary. If traditional journalism dies, what do we have left?
Björn4 May 2019 at 15:37
DeleteMSM in general and many documentaries in particular have in a hypnotic way, through their visualizations of the McCanns’ own fantasies, managed to keep the myth about the abduction alive.
The media have a job to do to maintain a large business that has big shareholders .They also do as they are told by politicians.Why would they want to present a hypnotic visualisations of the McCanns fantasies ? And where is the evidence that they are fantasies in the first place ? have you got any ?
247
''It’s about time now that the Grange gave all the British taxpayers a full report on everything they’ve done since they began co-operating with the Portuguese PJ. I see no reason why they shouldn’t.''
DeleteImagine a mind game between a crafty criminal staying one step ahead of the police for years. Imagine the Police gathering information ( allegedly) and almost catching him but not quite.So imagine them announcing to the world via the internet and media what they had been doing and what they are doing now.Imagine you are that criminal and you have a television and an internet connection.You can't seriously believe they'd do that just because people online are frustrated not knowing what's going on .
''Any government, democratic or totalitarian can easily defend itself against suspicion of corruption or fraud by keeping official files secret from their people on the pretext that it’s for their “subjects” own good and for the sake of justice. ''
Yes, sometimes. If it's a political matter.Terrorism for instance.But a nation doesn't need protecting from the truth of what happened to a little girl.
''As for the Madeleine case, nothing whatsoever, after almost nine (9) years of alleged investigation, can justify the British authorities’ silence about it.''
I've been saying that for a year here. But I get called a 'pro' and get accused of suggesting detectives have covered the facts up rather than their bosses.
'' I sometimes wonder if the Met/SY fear countermeasures from team McCann, if it would be publicly known that the McCanns are under investigation?''
Two powerful bodies have nothing whatsoever to fear from two civilians.How could they unless the two civilians had a catalogue of dangerous information against them. It makes no sense.What if the McCanns are under investigation ? Would that explain the invention of mask man or German man ? They'd investigate and arrest or not.What could Team McCann do that would scare the police ?
''Either there’re suspects or there aren’t, and people, not just the British citizens, are entitled to know! Don't you think so Rosalinda.''
Officially they are not suspects. Nothing since that pronouncement has suggested a change of mind.
''If traditional journalism dies, what do we have left?''
We'd have a 'dumbed down' , gullible public who didn't see the free press die years ago. Freedom of the press is like freedom of speech. It only sounds fair.But freedom, by definition, is unbound. Once you introduce conditions you kill it. Imagine if politicians told us we have ' a degree of freedom to speak, but that's all'' and the press could 'say what they like but only within certain limits'. They don't and won't say it.They just do it. A slow, gradual erosion that isn't easy to see unless you look closely.
Z
" Hello 247/ 4 May 2019 at 16:02
DeleteWhy would they want to present a hypnotic visualisations of the McCanns fantasies"
because such fantasies sell better than anything else related to the Madeleine case and nothing of it is really controversial and people actually love to live in what Rosalinda calls the McCanns' bizarro world. Speculating about the McCanns' guilt would also sell, but it could cost a lot if the McCanns would start to sue to the left and the right, which they used to do.
I think you have inadvertently explained why the McCanns guilt has been the most popular theory .Because it sells far better. It sells far better because most people like the shock and drama. It's more stimulating.By comparison, an unknown abductor is dull . As you also say, speculating about their guilt sells too. And let's face it, it doesn't matter how many thousands of such speculative thoughts are posted online, nobody doing it can be punished financially because it's just a discussion.Nobody is threatening anyone.
DeleteZ
Hi Z 4 May 2019 at 19:13
Delete"So imagine them announcing to the world via the internet and media what they had been doing and what they are doing now.Imagine you are that criminal and you have a television and an internet connection"
Yes, I understand that perfectly well, but now after more than 9 years of investigation, the OG must have something more to say about what they've done in terms of investigative research before this monstrous Surgical mask man came around.
Or are the OG perhaps trying to make us believe that this suspect has been found as a result of 9 years hard and systematic detective research and that they therefore cannot yet reveal all the details in forms of evidence, that they've been gathering for 9 years, as most of it may very surprisingly have led to this specific suspect in a German prison, who's going to be arrested and brought to justice any day soon.
I allow myself to believe that the OG have just randomly selected vulnerable and defenseless people, who cannot speak for themselves,whose existence they wouldn't know of, if some very co-operate and imaginative journalists hadn't told them. Framing this poor man, could be their last chance to prove that they aren't worthless and corrupt.
Björn5 May 2019 at 16:34
Delete''the OG must have something more to say about what they've done in terms of investigative research before this monstrous Surgical mask man came around. ''
Maybe they have, but it would still be dangerous to alert a potential suspect of how they are operating.Personally I believe they haven't got a thing to say about anything.I don't believe they are doing anything but create some 'theatre of the mind'. I believe they are part of the larger production company who have influenced how people view this case with vivid imagery.That's all we have, imagery prompted by what we've read and heard.It's mind games.Next year we'll probably be encouraged to imagine red eyes perched above the mask.We're back in the ' Madeleine is probably being kept in a cellar somewhere by her captors' imagery. it's discount store Edgar Allan Poe.
''Or are the OG perhaps trying to make us believe that this suspect has been found as a result of 9 years hard and systematic detective research''
Put it this way, the PJ have already dropped the ball on this one. They claim to have already questioned him years ago.If they charged him now they'll look stupid for wasting how many years funding ? They should have pretended he was a fresh suspect.That way, when they fail to charge him this time, they won't look incompetent or dishonest. Too late now, though. German man was this years funding bait.
''I allow myself to believe that the OG have just randomly selected vulnerable and defenseless people, who cannot speak for themselves,'
There's no evidence whatsoever that old 'masky' can't speak for himself.
'' Framing this poor man, could be their last chance to prove that they aren't worthless and corrupt.''
'This poor man' ? What's he in prison for ?
Z
Hi Bjorn, I think 'Bizarro world' actually comes from Superman, but I actually got it from Jerry Seinfeld who is a superman geek :) In Bizarro World everything is reversed, black is white, yes is no, hello is goodbye, or something like that.....lol
DeleteIn response to your first post Bjorn.
DeleteMy first response to your 'they should tell us' was, Oooh no, they mustn't give anything away, but then I thought, actually, when is enough enough? Isn't this the 7th or 8th year of Operation Grange? Investigations are supposed to lead to results, but not this one apparently.
OK, I am scolding the police now, I can't imagine any private industry working in this way, that is, to keep pouring money into something that is now resembling a bottomless pit. The police do not feel the need to explain themselves, but they do, they are using public money.
At the time OG asked for more funding, there was no sign of surgical mask man, their request predated him, the more funds referred to is funding of the Portuguese police. Something we have never heard about before but now being tied to this new lead.
To be honest, I don't this new lead as anything different to the hundreds of 'new leads' we have seen before. I suspect someone somewhere is working very hard trawling through lists of paedophiles and where they have been for the last 20 years. But if they want to keep the abduction story alive, someone's got to do it.
I think Operation Grange will conclude with the truth Bjorn, there really isn't any other option, if there had been, one or more would have come into play by now. Certainly if the objective was to clear the parents, they have done the opposite! Anyone believing Madeleine was alive would have had their minds changed by the diggers in PDL.
The gist of these latest stories is the police saying 'we have a suspect and it's not the McCanns'. But did the police really say that? Or are we just being led to believe the police said that?
There will be changes to my blog soon Bjorn, but I won't abandon the Madeleine stuff completely, as I suspect, there will be many visitors here as the truth is revealed!
Hello Rosalinda and thanks for reply
DeleteMaybe my thoughts reveal how disappointed I’m with what’s happening now in the UK, especially regarding the Julian Assange case, in which sadly enough my own country is involved in that they have neither been willing to grant Assagne asylum here, nor have our government been willing to guarantee that he’s not going to be extradited to the US if he were to defend himself against the allegations of sexual abuse in a Swedish court. Sweden as well as the UK seem to disrespect freedom of speech and the former, under the pressure of the latter now even questions the publics’ rights to access official files, which we’ve been able to do since the stone age in our country.
However it’s another case being discussed here, and I so much would wish the OG, not to reveal what they’re doing right now, but at least they should publicly announce whether the McCanns are still under investigation or not. Saying nothing is in itself misleading as rumours often tend to flourish in ambiguous situations. Anyway, let’s hope for the best Rosalinda.
'when the truth is revealed' lol You say that's about to happen more often than the met ask for their funds.You should join them
DeleteWhat do you have against the truth 13:36? Isn't that what the McCanns want? The truth about what happened to their daughter? They should be banging on SY's door demanding the truth, not hoping it would go away.
DeleteThere is a distinct Right turn in world politics Bjorn and it is frightening. Hilary Clinton's 'Deplorables' exist in every nation, and they are finding a voice in shameless fascists eager to lead them into an abyss.
DeleteI have always been mystified as to why working class people vote for political parties designed to keep them reliant on the generosity and fairmindedness of their billionaire employers. A system that makes the rich richer and the poor poorer.
In the UK, the face of cruelty and greed is Theresa May, but not far behind her, is the even worse, Boris Johnson and Lord Snooty (escapee from The Beano comic) Jacob Rees-Mogg. Two men with whom, only 1% of the population can empathise, royals and billionaires. The populace of the UK are so terrified of equality and kindness, they will vote for someone with a bigger whip.
I am afraid I am totally confused by Julian Assange, and I've seen the movie. That he assisted Trump and Russia I find unforgiveable, the policies of Trump are pure evil, my heart breaks for the immigrants in the US right now, who are being treated as the Jews were under Hitler.
I used to see Assange as one of those internet warriors who fight on behalf of all of us to keep the internet free and the information flowing. Maybe he was once, but working on behalf of one political party negates his 'freedom fighter' status, it aligns him to dictators Trump and Putin.
It's complex for sure Bjorn, and I don't pretend to understand, but it is indeed a murky world right now.
You say they want it to go away. You make things like that all the time.What kind of person gets a kick from doing things like that.It's sick. If the truth ever is revealed they might find out where their kid went.Then all the stupid claims of people like you can finally disappear.No more slandering people and making stories up
DeleteRosalinda Hutton6 May 2019 at 14:21
Delete''I am afraid I am totally confused by Julian Assange, and I've seen the movie. ''
Yes, Ros, and if you hope to 'learn' from movies, you'll remain bemused.That's half the reason they make them.Try study.
In what way did he assist Trump ? By exposing Bill Clinton's lunatic of a wife ?The propaganda in that country is off the scale. Why do so many people just nod and say thank you for feeding me more crap ?Nobody does their own research now. They'll buy any garbage if it's quicker.Yes, Trump's a complete dick.Yes, he's a power hungry despot. Yes he's of low intellectual prowess.But it's America. The whole country should have seen that before he became the lone runner for the party. But they saw a well known billionaire celebrity instead. Hilary Clinton ? She makes Bill look like the Pope.Next time you visit the land of apple pie, see if anyone's watching the debates between her and Trey Gowdy uploaded to youtube.
Assange is what it says on the tin. A freedom fighter willing to expose the evil in high places.In a world where totalitarianism is the obvious collective goal of the world leaders, that takes more than a big set of cahoonas. Many tried to say he was a double agent working for them rather than against them. They forgot that he's now living locked in a prison in all but name to stay alive. That's how the world leaders treat threats to their power and the releasing of truth, and exposoition of their lies.
Why would Assange accept that life ? What has he gained compared to what he's lost ?He's sacrificed his own liberty and has to hide behind closed doors in fear for his life just for fighting for the liberty of you and me. Anyone hated and feared by Obama has to be good.His trumped up rape allegation was sickening.
Z
Hi Ziggy 6 May 2019 at 15:21
Delete"His trumped up rape allegation was sickening"
Yes, it really was Ziggy, though we're little bit off topic here.
I haven't personally read the Swedish files about the Assagne rape allegations, but Swedish newspapers have referred to them in various articles and there isn't much in them as far as I understand, that could've led to a prosecution.
What I feared then( 7 years ago) was that our government would immediately, after having found nothing substantial in the alleged accusations of sexual abuse, extradite Assange to the US, even without any court proceedings.
CIA have secretely in co-operation with our authorities taken suspects, even a Swedish citizen, to be heard and convicted in the US (suspicion of terrorism).
At least Assange is now given a fair chance in an English court to defend himself against being extradited.
The British opposition (labour) seems to be wise enough to defend freedom of expression. Corbyn has had the courgae to speak out, but does he understand how weak our Swedish society is in terms of resisting the pressure that the US may exert on us? May the UK justice save Assange for the sake of our freedom of expression.
Maybe this could be a subject to discuss on Rosalinda's blog later, but it's all up to Rosalinda of course.
You should have more knowledge about the rape laws than I, bjorn as it pertains to Sweden's rather than those here in the UK or US.
DeleteAs i remember it, a certain female took Assange to bed and they did the deed.he was quite a notch for the bedpost given his celebrity status in the alt movement. She wanted to boast so tweeted about it and invited friends to a party. Not the usual reaction of a rape victim. The female, as it turned out, had links to CIA operatives and America. Now, I don't know about now, but back then you couldn't remove any tweets once you'd made them.She tried and failed but she received assistance later. The 'rape' according to Swedish law related to 'sex by surprise'. I laughed at that and tried to remember my ever having to say something along the lines of '' opps sorry...didn't see you there'' to any of my former lucky ladies.But the 'surprise' translated to it meaning that having done the deed, the lady then realises you weren't wearing a condom when she assumed you had done. That was enough for Obomber to take to the podium and repeat into the camera '' No means no'' as his justification to hunt down the man who had - coincidentally - exposed his corruption and the corruption of his partners in crime.
America, ideologically, is an extension / continuation of Nazi Germany. When the war ended the Nazi ideology just changed location.They actually saved thousands of nazis fron the rope and gave them papers to move to the states( paperclip).NASA was built by one of their most important scientists, remember. Germany wanted to rule the world.They wanted everyone to dance to their tune and answer to them.Sound familiar ( Obama, Trump ) ?
Corbyn does have the courage to speak out right now. But he isn't the PM. He is a threat to the Conservatives and he is a threat to the members of his own party who realise that if you genuinely want to take power, you need to make the right noises in the right circles.Particularly if we'e talking about the economy and banks. That's why he's facing accusations of anti semitism as soon as he says anything.Those who point at him are looking for brownie points off the real powers that be later ..
Freedom of expression is dying.Too many snowflakes floating around in your face.You can't say this, you can't say that, you can't think that, you shouldn't say the other.Then, by the time you've memorised all the things it isn't politically correct to say- you'e told you live as a free man in a democracy.Bollocks really.
The UK always mimics America in true monkey-see-monkey-do fashion.The US put together a huge tome called the patriot act. basically a really long instruction book outlining all the rights you no longer have( in the name of guarding their freedom of course)All they needed was a genuine reason to enforce it.They got one within months called 9 / 11. Then the UK stared blowing themselves up to create more clampdowns on their freedom too . It's ''for your own good'' is the new rule.just stay online..enjoy your leisure and go back to sleep...
Z
Hi Ziggy 6 May 2019 at 19:57
DeleteFor once, I agree with everything you've said in your post here.
As far as the Swedish alleged rape accusations in the Assange case are concerned, and under what circumstances they came about, I believe you're close to the truth.
We've inaugerated a few sex laws here in Sweden recently, that are beyond belief absurd, but it'll perhaps be a theme for discussion in general sense later on, if Rosalinda finds it interesting.
I believe, given Gamble's latest claim that Governments don't hand over money willy nilly in times of Austerity, as well the growing cynicism of the public who are watching money go nowhere has prompted the respective Home Offices to come up with a 'Plan B'.
ReplyDeletehen a police officer applies for an search warrant, they have to convince a judge of the strength of their case against a suspect first. When the police want to ty somebody, they have to convince a prosecutor that public money will be well spent.So, when they ask their Home Office for large sums of money, when the funding has led to nothing year after year, the natural reaction would be to refuse them any unless they can provide evidence or assurances that it isn't wasted money. In this case, what can the police possibly reply with and still maintain credibility ? Nothing.according to the 12 years.So, what's the compromise ? What can quell the public's demand for explanations ? Easy. What feeds their hunger for such things ? The media of course.So, utilise your national press to come up with intrigue. Take some archetypes from true crime documentaries. Even a horror story ( a mask is good-weird- but good).Job done. Prior to the request, prime Mr and Mrs Joe Public. It's the oldest trick in the book.Tried and trusted. In this case, the priming took the form of the German paedophile in prison and the odd 'source' and 'unnamed' ( always makes it sound highly sensitive-ergo real).Then, as the anniversary happens and emotions are high and at the forefront, give it some flesh for it's bones. Enter 'man in a mask' who has form for abducting little girls. Suddenly the public forget about the mundanity of funding.Cheques are signed. Job done. Stage two is trying to convince the public that there really was reason to suspect him once they have to explain why nothing was done about him...
This case has become plastered with symbolic stereotypes . It's riddled with cliche. Most were constructed in the collective psyche of an injured public who were driven by a picture of the beautiful little face that was snatched from our world.It's hard to reason when your emotions have the wheel.But it's hard to switch emotion off when you see innocence like that abused and destroyed.We have the internet now and our thoughts are projected on to a huge universal screen for the observation of anyone- including media, police, and officialdom.They get it. And they know how to feed it or starve it. It's virtual classical conditioning. Pavlov would be shaking his head in despair at us.Don't mention the dogs to him by the way...we'll be here too long..
Z (s)
Hi Z(iggy)
Delete"So, utilise your national press to come up with intrigue. Take some archetypes from true crime documentaries. Even a horror story ( a mask is good-weird- but good).Job done"
Unfortunately, too good a summary of how the OG year after year have succeeded in getting funds for its ,in all respects, failed investigation of a highly unspecified crime, which could be anything from a missing person case, abduction, child neglect,accidental death, rape or murder committed by any person dead or alive. So help us God!
Yes, very poetic Z, good to see you making an effort, however the symbolic stereotypes and the cliché did not come from the collective psyche of an injured (?) public moved by the beautiful little face.
DeleteThe symbolic stereotypes and cliché came directly from Team McCann, beginning with Eggman who evolved into 'ugly man', 'spotty man' 'Smelly man' 'George Harrison' and a werewolf. Or, he could have been a woman, a woman who looks like Victoria Beckham. Now he is an English speaking German wearing a surgical mask.
These stereotypes are not coming from the public's imagination Z, they are coming from stories fed to tabloid reporters who are keen to convince the public that the McCanns are innocent.
I've thought about it. Why should they have to sell their home to fund a search that the police should be undertaking.It's obvious. Think about that.
DeleteOscar Slater6 May 2019 at 14:18
Delete''I can't answer that 01:05, but now the first patsy has been discounted, a second German has been suggested . Maybe something to do with the war?''
Don't know if you showed any interest in this case about 8 years ago, Ocacr, but if you did you might remember the chaos caused by the assertions of the pseudo-eccentric Shrimpton ( the spy catcher himself).
He was doing the rounds on local radio stations and internet stations promoting his up and coming book. He is a well educated man with a public school background so it's a fair guess to say he knows a lot of a***holes. But while he's a good speaker and well versed in what he discusses, he also tends to blame the Germans for everything from the great flood to the closure of Woolworths. It seems he isn't a fan.Don't mention the war, to quote Mr fawlty.
Back then, he said with a calm confident air that it was the German DVD who organised the abduction of Madeleine and used it as leverage on somebody high up.he mentioned this in the same conversation in which he named Ted heath as a DVD asset ( and well known paedophile).Strong and dangerous stuff. He would have been well aware of the legal ramifications as his other 'job' was as a QC. They earn obscene amounts of money.
Fast forward a little bit.The Olympics are coming to London.Nearby blocks of flats are basically evacuated as the Military have decided to cover their rooftops with anti aircraft missiles as another notable German- the queen- will be in attendance and terrorism was very fashionable at the time. In the meantime, Shrimpy is still doing the rounds ( i think Ms Poulson interviewed him at one point on an internet TV platform).Fast forward again and poor old Shrimpy i'd before the beak for 'leaking' false information about foiling a planned assassination of her majesty.He gets found guilty and receives a prison sentence. During his trial he realises that developing bi-polar disorder was also fashionable at that time as a few celebrities were pretending to have it.He uses it as his defence( ''I didn't know what I was saying your honour''). He also tries to apply for legal aid( cheeky).Anyway, he takes his porridge like a man and emerges a bi-polar free born again whatever he is.he then does the same rounds making things right.He explains that fellow MI agents had given him incorrect information about the Madeleine case.Why would they give him any at all ? He retracted everything.
Ironically, 6 months after the Madeleine event, he was speaking about the EU and the legal system( and the Germans, of course). Am I right in thinking he defended Bennett in his case against the McCanns ? Not sure about that but i think i read it somewhere.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TuA1dFeQf1s
I recommend the Richie Allen show on youtube to anyone. hers; one with him interviewing Shrimpton.. the Madeleine case gets a mention here. Is it all bollocks ? maybe it is.But there's no escaping the fact that MI6 did involve themselves and we are yrt to be told why...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dZvcr2TS4Xk
Z
Rosalinda Hutton6 May 2019 at 14:40
Delete''Yes, very poetic Z, good to see you making an effort, however the symbolic stereotypes and the cliché did not come from the collective psyche of an injured (?) public moved by the beautiful little face.''
Still badgering away at Ziggy Ros ? You shouldn't be, it looks like you're trying too hard. His posts are well laid out. If you disagree just say so.But the snipes are low.
Peter
Rosalinda Hutton6 May 2019 at 14:40
Delete''These stereotypes are not coming from the public's imagination Z, they are coming from stories fed to tabloid reporters who are keen to convince the public that the McCanns are innocent.''
You're talking about still images.You read about them then see them presented via a media platform.It's been the springboard of numerous nutty narratives ever since.The public see them then the public begin writing stories. On this blog alone we've read who done what, why and how.many different scenarios.Then we've seen the same written about how the McCanns behave and what they talk about when in private at home. That's not a fevered imagination ? Not ignited by images and suggestion ?
We've had the 'B' movie horror of a zombie like unspeaking and unresponsive Gerry walking the dark streets of PDL with a lifeless little girl in his arms. We've had them covertly sneaking into the Chapel in the wee small hours with a suspicious looking baggage( where they allegedly secreted the body into a coffin).We've had tales of a cute little girl with 'new' parents sighted all over the place.Then we had a 'hardened detective' with not so much as a spec of evidence suggesting she was kept in bondage in a cellar by her captor/s. All theatre of the mind. None of it has anything in the world of reality.If all the images you say are fed to the public to convince the public of the McCanns' innocence, why do so many of the fictional narratives that emerge have them as guilty in the eyes of the public ? They end up as two psychopaths, a narcissist and a neurotic, a pair of well connected criminals with friends in high places , and so on.That's stereotyping at it's nuttiest.It's all been 'done' in made-for-TV movies.The same audience consider themselves qualified to assess crimes now.maybe they are, as long as they happen in movies.They wouldn't stand up long under cross examination in court.
We hadn't seen man in a mask before people were trying to make connections between a surgical( ?) mask and the fact that McCann and friends are doctors.That was only on this blog. God knows what's happened on Twitter and other mines of information.That's how suggestion works ; paint he image in the head ( mask) mention he looks like an efit ( a criminal) and leave the pot to simmer..
Z
It's either bullshit to justify the money or a patsy is being lined up to take the blame.
ReplyDeleteTake your pick.
DM
why can't both be right
DeleteI agree,I thought so too after I posted.
DeleteDM
Nobody could ever accuse the McCanns of being murderers.
ReplyDelete...That would be wicked.
They were two innocent doctors holidaying abroad with their three toddlers when one night one of the children disappeared into thin air - taken by abductors - it could happen to anyone.
That's exactly what three British Prime ministers and numerous top British investigators thought too. You can't get more gold plated for back-up than that.
The fly in the ointment was the police judiciary of Portugal who thought otherwise and proceeded to investigate the parents as suspects in their missing daughter's demise.
To them ( they didn't believe the parent's story for one moment) it was obvious she was dead but to this day the PJ sadly don't have enough evidence to prosecute.
(unless I hope they have an ace up their sleeve).
Imagine this. What would a normal person think: The parents and all witnesses quickly leave Portugal and all refuse to answer questions to the police or return to Portugal for a crime scene reconstruction to find the parent's "abducted" daughter. Even a boy scout could read between the lines and see the little girl was very much dead on the night of May 3rd 2007 and everything that followed implicated the parents as cover up.
In the end, the best thing the parents could do in a fit of uncontrolled rage was to sue the chief Portuguese investigator Goncalo Amaral for writing a book about what really happened.
That'll teach you dago.
But even that ploy backfired; Amaral was cleared/renumerated and from that point on the world looked at the parents as the suspects.
Iustitia the blindfold goddess of justice probably has a sixth sense about this case. Maybe justice will prevail.
jc
Hi jc
Delete"Even a boy scout could read between the lines and see the little girl was very much dead on the night of May 3rd 2007 and everything that followed implicated the parents as cover up"
Nobody with just the slightest bit of common sense didn't even have to read between the lines that night to suspect that Madeleine was dead and after the evidence of the dogs' alerts became known, only complete idiots or severe criminals could still claim that the child could be alive. It's more important to the McCanns to make people believe that Madeleine "hasn't come to any harm"than to assist the investigation in helping it to solve the case,if there's an investigation.
Anonymous5 May 2019 at 03:30 - jc
Delete''Nobody could ever accuse the McCanns of being murderers.
...That would be wicked.''
No, jc, it would be illegal. Not that that's ever put you off, of course.
''disappeared into thin air - taken by abductors''
Which one ? Disappeared into thin air, or abducted ?
''That's exactly what three British Prime ministers and numerous top British investigators thought too.''
As did ( and do ) the PJ of Portugal.
'' suspects in their missing daughter's demise.''
You can't stop lying.It was their missing daughters disappearance( and still is) not demise.
''it was obvious she was dead but to this day the PJ sadly don't have enough evidence to prosecute.''
They didn't have enough to prove she is dead either.The still haven't.
''(unless I hope they have an ace up their sleeve).''
Why would they keep an ace up there instead of playing it ?
''Imagine this. What would a normal person think:''
That's not really a skill you have yourself, jc.
'' Even a boy scout could read between the lines and see the little girl was very much dead on the night of May 3rd 2007 and everything that followed implicated the parents as cover up.''
So we went wrong giving the gig to the PJ, SY, MI5 and OG. We should have used boy scouts. OK.
''In the end, the best thing the parents could do in a fit of uncontrolled rage was to sue the chief Portuguese investigator Goncalo Amaral for writing a book about what really happened''
I think that rage was controlled. The wheels of justice move slowly.They wanted his right to publish damning accusations curtailed.That's what they were and what they are.If they weren't, we'd have seen his book used to solve the crime by now. Why haven't we ?
''But even that ploy backfired; Amaral was cleared/renumerated and from that point on the world looked at the parents as the suspects.''
He was only 'cleared' to go ahead with his publishers, it didn't relate to a criminal trial or the fate of Madeleine. Those, like yourself, who pretend its the opposite don't understand the difference or need to ignore the difference in order to be able to promote the narrative that serves your agenda.Not the truth.
''Iustitia the blindfold goddess of justice probably has a sixth sense about this case. Maybe justice will prevail.''
It has as much chance as blind accusations, blinkered vision , and myopic thinking, I'm afraid.Don't by the popcorn any time soon.
Z
Björn5 May 2019 at 12:55
Delete''Nobody with just the slightest bit of common sense didn't even have to read between the lines that night to suspect that Madeleine was dead and after the evidence of the dogs' alerts became known, only complete idiots or severe criminals could still claim that the child could be alive''
I'm gathering from that, that you consider Grime as a complete idiot, then, bjorn.Him and several detectives.The night jc is dreaming about, there were no dogs to detect anything.After the dogs were finally utilised,there were new areas of interest indicated by them that seemed to warrant further investigation.They didn't find evidence of anything. They indicated where there could be some though.Have you neve read the reports ?Or does it contradict you ?
'' It's more important to the McCanns to make people believe that Madeleine "hasn't come to any harm"than to assist the investigation in helping it to solve the case,if there's an investigation.''
If the McCanns are telling the truth, it's normal and understandable to wish for that.True, it isn't realistic after all this time.It wasn't realistic after 48 hours.But they had to cling to something.There wasn't anything they could do or could do now to assist the investigation. If there was, they'd have been told by the police.But there are lot of officers earning nice money to investigate this crime.They shouldn't need any more assistance. Obviously, if the McCanns are guilty of killing their child or causing her death and then burying her body, then yes, what you say is justified.But it's the job of the detectives to find that out. Then we can all post our deep set anger. I'll be part of that choir then.But not yet.I need to see more.So do you if you're honest.That's why we're all still looking on.
Z
Hello z(iggy)5 May 2019 at 17:26
Delete"I'm gathering from that, that you consider Grime as a complete idiot, then, bjorn.Him and several detectives"
Grime and his dogs detected the scent of death, which is evidence of a dead body or parts of a dead body, having been in the apartment and in the McCanns' car or in contact with items that had been or still were in those places.
Grime provided the Portuguese investigation with these results and there cannot be any doubts about there having been a dead body near the McCanns at some point of time, it's just that it theoretically could've been another dead body than Madeleine's, and only the McCanns can tell if they disposed of Madeleine's body or somebody else's, but a dead body it must've been, but not sea bass fish as Gerry suggested.
''Grime and his dogs detected the scent of death, which is evidence of a dead body or parts of a dead body, having been in the apartment and in the McCanns' car or in contact with items that had been or still were in those places.''
DeleteI don't think you understood my post, bjorn. The dogs alerted to the possible scent of death or decaying flesh yes.They 'indicated. that. They didn't find 'evidence'. They alerted to areas that could yield evidence if the detectives looked closer in those areas and subjected them to forensic analysis.Then , if there is corroborating evidence to the scent, the DNA and the blood found at the scene, the police can call it evidence.According to the FSS, that didn't happen.That's why no evidence exists-officially. The alternative narrative is that some of that evidence was 'tampered with' in transit ( Amaral says so, anyway).Or plainly speaking the police for whatever reason have decided to close shop on the evidence and tell us all it didn't exist.That might also explain why the offer of a deeper analysis hasn't been taken up.But if you or anyone else insist that the dogs' indicating equals evidence, I think you should have the courage of your convictions and include how the transcripts and official statements from Grime and the FSS have to be ignored as dishonest or incorrect.
''Grime provided the Portuguese investigation with these results and there cannot be any doubts about there having been a dead body near the McCanns at some point of time''
Again, when you make statements like that so dogmatically you should have the courage to explain why the official line says there are doubts and no corroborating evidence.You can state it as an opinion, which would demonstrate you are honest at least.But you state it as a fact and as a fact that can withstand any doubt.
''and only the McCanns can tell if they disposed of Madeleine's body or somebody else's, but a dead body it must've been, but not sea bass fish as Gerry suggested.''
There is no evidence whatsoever to substantiate a claim like that. First there's none of a death( officially). Second, there's none that says- even if the child was killed- that the parents were responsible for it.If they weren't responsible it could be a predator / abductor. You were asked on the last thread to show a source for your claim that it takes two hours for cadaverine to begin to develop. You didn't do it. You were shown a source that explains it begins within minutes. You didn't comment.
Z
Ziggy are you not capable of picking up the key points in a text? Why must you incessantly copy and paste every post that gone before? The rest of us can manage to hold a discussion without writing out schoolboy essays, why can't you?
DeleteI'm so utterly pissed off with you abusing my blog, you are driving me away! I literally groan at the length and tedium of your posts, I can't even be arsed to answer them anymore.
I'm afraid you are in a minority there Rosalinda. I for one find Ziggy's posts interesting, well presented and informative.I'm sure I'm not the only one.You're rudeness is becoming very irrational of late I've noticed.Most of your criticisms are of a personal nature and that drives people away.You should be grateful that broader aspects of the case are discussed rather than the single 'it was the mum and dad' angle. You shouldn't accuse others of abuse when it seems to be your speciality these days.Don't blame Ziggy for what isn't happening with the case.
DeletePeter D
Ziggy's posts are really enjoyable lately. What's the matter with you Ros
Deletejc :
Delete''Iustitia the blindfold goddess of justice probably has a sixth sense about this case. Maybe justice will prevail.
jc''
Better still jc, if she took the blind fold off she wouldn't need a sixth sense.
Ziggy 5 May 2019 at 22:30
DeleteGrime's findings clearly suggest that the MacCanns at some point of time must've been in contact with a cadaver or parts of it, but as you're implying, that doesn't prove that the scent originated from Madeleine and it's not a crime to be near a dead body. Nor is it always a crime to move it around. I just tried to point out that the the dogs' alerts, if they're/were reliable, prove that the McCanns have been in close contact with a human cadaver, though not necessarily belonging to Madeleine and I believe that it's quite logical and relevant to ask the McCanns what body it could've been. Try to keep things as simple as possible Ziggy.
Grime didn't say that the indicators suggested that the McCanns had been in contact with anything. Unless you can show me that.
DeleteTue, it isn't a crime to move a dead body around.But it's a crime to conceal a crime and to conceal a death.
The alerts are not regarded as proof of anything. They need to be corroborated. That's what the reports say.If the reports are right that's the end of discussion. If they're wrong or being suppressed, that can't be discovered as it would take the collusion of those apparently investigating it.That's a different set of criminal charges.
''Try to keep things as simple as possible Ziggy.''
I think you're overlooking the power of forensic analysis, DNA analysis, and the huge advances that they have brought to crime detection.If you want to 'keep things simple' there's going to be thousands of criminals out there for years.Thousands have been nailed after years of the cases being cold thanks to advances in forensics. And, let's face it, this case is in need of some very powerful microscopes.
Z
They say in your own home your 3 feet away from a spider. Accordingly the MSM will have us believe in Portugal your 3 feet away from a paedophile. The E-Fit of the latest suspect looks more like The Creature From The Black Lagoon.
ReplyDelete"They say in your own home your 3 feet away from a spider. Accordingly the MSM will have us believe in Portugal your 3 feet away from a paedophile. The E-Fit of the latest suspect looks more like The Creature From The Black Lagoon."
DeleteIn Jersey, since the child abuse enquiry, we seem to have had at least one paedophile conviction every week. Just this week the police and child care authorities publically stated that, "one in 20 children in the Island will be victims of sexual abuse before they turn 18".
Our spiders are harmless.
Gary (from Jersey)
The E-fit looks remarkably like Martin Ney, the German who is now the chief suspect in Madeleine's disappearance. In jail for killing three children and suspected of killing at least two more, and well as abusing many more. He is reported as staying in the Algarve when Madeleine disappeared, and that he knew the region well. And, if the Smiths really did see the abductor, Ney's MO appears to fit frightenly well: -
DeleteIn March 1992, a teacher in the hallway of the Schullandheim Cluvenhagen saw a man carrying a drowsy boy who did not resist. When the offender noticed the teacher, he fled. In the early morning of 31 March 1992, the 13-year-old Stefan Jahr disappeared from a boarding school in Scheeßel. Five weeks later, his body was found buried with his hands tied behind his backs in the Verden dunes.
On 7 April 2004, 11-year-old Jonathan Coulom disappeared from a school home in Saint-Brevin-les-Pins in western France. In May, his undressed, handcuffed body weighted with a concrete block was found in a pond about 30 kilometres away.
In July 1995, 8-year-old Dennis Rostel disappeared from a tent camp in Northern Germany. Two weeks later, tourists found his body buried in a sand dune in Skive, Denmark.
G
Martin Ney, 48 from Germany. He looks like one of the efits apparently( could explain why all the efits look completely different-hedge bets).Apparently he was in Portugal when Madeleine was taken.PJ interviewed him back then and he said he had nothing to do with it so they were happy with that.But they ween't after funding then wee they..
Deletehttps://uk.yahoo.com/news/madeleine-mccann-investigators-probe-convicted-123416716.html
Z
Ain't that the truth John, it seems the sleepy little town of PDL, is rife with not only paedophiles, but swingers and burglars. It sounds more like the crime capital of Europe than a friendly family holiday resort.
DeleteI think if anyone bothered to look back at all the suspects over the year we would end up with quite a menagerie of odd bods. Are the police so desperate to come up with a suspect (not a McCann), anyone who has ever been to Portugal will do?
But who has planted this story? The police? The tip off apparently came from OG to the PJ who are now being granted more funding because of it. Really? And where did OG get the tip off? Going through files of banged up paedophiles worldwide to see if any of them ever visited the Algarve?
The German guy was investigated by the PJ many years ago, ergo they did not need a tip off about him from Scotland Yard. He was ruled out 'because he liked boys'. A minor detail for those desperate for a patsy, but integral to the motivation and modus operandi of this particular creep. If he was spending his evenings watching the apartment of the McCann family, he might just as well have spent that time watching families with boys, his own particular taste.
Has anyone got any evidence that this story has come from the police, either PJ or OG? Where is it's origin? The British tabloids have put a lot more meat on the story than Correio da Manho?
Z, representative of the McCanns, is using the latest story to have a bash at the PJ. Ie. He is accusing the PJ of using this story to get more funding, implying they weren't bothered when they first interviewed him, but is now because they want more money. Do you really think the Portuguese police and the Portuguese Judiciary are that backward Z? You wish.
Rosalinda Hutton5 May 2019 at 22:55
Delete''Has anyone got any evidence that this story has come from the police, either PJ or OG? Where is it's origin? The British tabloids have put a lot more meat on the story than Correio da Manho?''
From what I've read, a certain 'Johnny on the spot' was fed first. Sky ? Daily Mail have been running the public circus side of things since day one. Murdoch's minions ( Freud et al). I won't mention names but ask yourself who seems to be 'at the scene' so quick he almost gets knocked over by the perpetrator.His name rhymes with Martin Brunt...
''Z, representative of the McCanns, is using the latest story to have a bash at the PJ. Ie. He is accusing the PJ of using this story to get more funding,''
Possibly so.Or even probably so. But he's sticking his neck out this time.The Uk public are far more annoyed by our own con artists asking for more from the kitty than what the PJ are up to.The PJ aren't asking us for anything. Mitchell's there in his unofficial role as arse kisser politician and spokesperson nobody believes anyway.
' Do you really think the Portuguese police and the Portuguese Judiciary are that backward Z? You wish.''
Why would I wish that ? Haven't you read what I've posted ?
Z
As the first inkling we had this story was going to break was via Amaral, it's worth considering who told him.
DeleteI think it's just as likely he heard the rumour from someone at the CdM as an insider at the PJ.
If that's the case, where did the CdM get the story? And, is there any evidence that the PJ have applied for "funding".
Apart from anything else, they are the native police force. They wouldn't apply for funding to investigate a lead on a crime on their soil.
As usual, it was Sky / Brunt et al who ran the story here.Brunt has 'previous' for having phone numbers to call before exclusives ( he had both Murat's remember ...remember the conversation about Murat's 'contract'...then Murat got in to trouble for trying to find out where the investigation was going).
DeleteOn a more cynical but accurate note. A scan of this thread will show that the amazing germalists covering this case are behind us, not ahead. I expressed interest in when they'd admit the German was only made up and on what grounds they'll come up with to clear him and explain why they were so interested in a man they'd cleared years ago. I expected to see the answers next week. We already have them as of this morning ( but still behind us )
Turns out Brunt / Sky were being dishonest about the six foot sparrow in a track suit. What a shock. Such trusted sources too.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/madeleine-mccann-child-killer-martin-15003287
''48-year-old convicted German paedophile Ney was not the new prime suspect.''
Z
I wish the Met had better reference material than old episodes of Scooby Doo. That way they wouldn't be so obsessed with getting cash to by snacks, and might even do some work.
ReplyDelete(Cressida Dick is a dead ringer for Velma by the way.)
I have to defend Velma. I know it's a bit chauvinistic, but she had better curves.I quite fancied her as youngun'. How i miss being 19.
DeleteZ
There seems to be a sudden slowing down of McCann fever online over the past few days.I don't think it's through lack of interest or curiosity, I think it's more about the sudden explosion of activity and alleged developments in a short period of time after another long gap with nothing in it. It's difficult to know what to think given the long history of spin and BS the case has behind it.
DeleteWe had the anniversary of the night a couple of days ago and the reports and pictures that came from an invasion of Rothley.The quotes, the thoughts, the messages. Them as is now tradition, along with the anniversary the police were prepared to have a spotlight on themselves. Obviously if everyone's getting a reminder about the case still being unsolved, then they'll question why not.So, their way of pre-empting such audacity from the public, they make a request for money and call their press officers to broadcast that they're doing it.That tells the public it must be real if they're asking for funding. And so on....
Then we have the PJ end of things asking for more pocket money as they have 'more than one suspect' ( learning from their Casa Pia history i suppose).The 'leaked' information about a German paedophile sat in a prison suddenly hits the headlines. Apparently he was questioned once before by the PJ and he said it wasn't him.So they slapped his wrist and told him to play nice and be good.Is he part of the 'more than one' ? According to the snippets he operated alone in his fancy mask. So that sort of precludes a 'ring'.Or are they going for both ? Maybe the PJ have a harder time getting their Government to waste cash.They need to embellish..
Then there was the news about Gerry being in Italy 'on business' rather than being with Kate showing solidarity on the anniversary.That's been pounced on by the antis as further evidence of his callousness; his iron will and ruthless psychotic streak.They forget he's actually intelligent as well. He's have anticipated all that.But his business trip seems almost an act of defiance. Like he doesn't care for the show anymore and he can't be bothered about the internet madness.I have joined these dots properly, however, in my opinion.Yes, it may seem cold of him to be in Italy at such a poignant time.But think about it.The papers and internet have been splashing all of the 'new leads' all over the place as they begged for more holiday money.They named names and showed a photograph this time. They never do that.They must be desperate to convince the tax payers how genuine it all is.Do you really think the public got to see all that information before the parents of Madeleine were privately informed of it ? An anniversary imminent and they wouldn't want to give them the hope ? It isn't realistic. The whole thing lends an air of something ominous to the proceedings. Like finally there's going to be something to a 'lead' for once.An arrest is imminent and we're going to finally learn who the perpetrator is who has stayed one step ahead of all those officers for so long.If any of this was true, the press hounds would be salivating and have three mobile phones on red alert as well as a film crew.And the parents would both be ready for a development. Gerry's trip abroad suggests he wasn't impressed by the developments at all.Like he doesn't but any of it.Like he knows it's more of the same.
Shall we see...
Z
From what I've learned so far the story about the German paedophile was a lead that came directly from OG. If this is true then there's no way a proper and honest search for the truth is being undertaken.
ReplyDeleteWhat a complete an utter farce, and no mistake.
Who's protecting the McCanns? People often say, probably the same person/people protecting Martin Brunt and Jim Gamble I would hazard a guess.
Wider agenda? Oh yes indeed, it most certainly was and evidently still is and the pact remains as bulletproof as ever it was.
There will be no truth about what really happened to Madeleine and where she is now coming out anytime soon. GUARANTEED!
That could equally be because politicians are scared of the truth coming out.This latest tangent has only made the over elaborate misdirection exercise look like a cover up- or it will do once we all see nothing come of it.Way too much effort to protect two brits. Too much effort and too much money.It's now reached the point where we can say they are genuinely taking the p**ss.
DeleteBernie
Anonymous5 May 2019 at 17:40
DeleteWhy do you believe that inventing a German suspect is being done to protect the McCanns.
I can't answer that 01:05, but now the first patsy has been discounted, a second German has been suggested . Maybe something to do with the war?
DeleteAnonymous 6 May 2019 at 1:05
DeleteDo what I was told to do years ago when I met friends of Brian and Susan Healy at Faro airport.
When I asked why Kate and Gerry were asking the public for money and not selling their own assets, I was told to "think about it".
I kindly ask you to do the same.
I thought about it. Why should Kate and Gerry have to sell their home in order to fund an investigation that the Portuguese police were supposed to be investigating ?
DeleteHello Anon 5 May 2019 at 17:40, and others as well
ReplyDelete”Clarence Mitchell, the McCann's spokesman said: ’It might be him and he fits the profile, he is a known predatory paedophile and he's a foreigner’ ”
Martin Evans, The Telegraph, 5 May 2019
The serial killer, rapist, paedophile, Martin Ney, who’s said to have been in PDL at the same time as the McCanns is apparently under investigation. I’m so excited to see how far the SY can take their suspicion about his guilt in Madeleine’s disappearance.
” He resembles a photo-fit issued in 2013 of a man who was spotted acting suspiciously in Praia da Luz around the time Madeleine was abducted”
M.E, T. 5 May 2019
This suspect didn’t just turn up by chance, but was chosen for a specific purpose, that is, to be made a scapegoat of. To be honest, I cannot think of a more perfect living person to blame it all on, besides he’s already in the eyes of the general public, before the Grange has made any announcement, thanks to the most notorious liar who’s ever been supporting the McCanns. Who cannot now see where the case is going?
I can see where. . The politician who has been protected for 12 years will continue to be protected.Clarence the 'former' politician and 'former' family spokesman is on the case again being paid as neither ? I don't think so somehow. He' getting some of that funding.Clarence won't look at you until you've crossed his plan with silver.
DeleteFitting that the politician /spokesman/ media controller/ who isn't being paid for any of the above turns up as the cheques are signed and the fictions are presented to the public.Now let's see the reason our German money maker is cleared for.Then the PJ's 'more than one suspect'. The information being fed to the public smells rank.
Z
Ziggy, I can't recall a suspect getting so much coverage for a couple of years. Do you think this is an attempt to revive support and interest, on the back of the Netflix bollocks?
DeleteI couldn't say for sure, Oscar. But the 'biggies' are always well timed.The documentary was timed to run up until just after the anniversary. That would certainly revive interest.After twelve years it may even catch a new generation and draw them in to the curiosity. A brief check on the history of the investigation would have taught them that they would make the headlines and as they finished it's almost a sort of 'follow that' moment at the end of a variety show. Not easy.So it seems both forces have followed that with this mish mash of suspects.Apart from Murat, I don't recall a suspect even being named or his photograph going public.I thought that was against the law.Especially after Leveson. Remember Christopher Jeffries ?But the excitement and anticipation they have generated this year has certainly re-ignited the interest of those who were becoming bored, and caught the interest of potential newcomers to it.Great PR.Crap investigating technique. But great PR.
DeleteZ
Great PR you say Ziggy and I agree, it seems Gerry and Clarence still have the magic touch. Great PR Crap investigating technique - so that's a point to Team McCann and nothing for the two police forces. Not only did they score zero points there, but they have been made to look incompetent and inept.
DeleteGreat PR. But then the McCann have always been great at PR - they have kept the abduction story alive in the face of the overwhelming odds against it. Here we are 12 years on still talking about an abductor. Great PR.
Did Operation Grange really wait 8 years to send the PJ the name of a notorious paedophile who, according to you Z, even has his own Wiki page? Did the PJ, who have said zilch, really leak this 'new lead' to Correio da Manha? Maybe they thought to themselves, the parents of Madeleine will be getting a lot of stick so let's chuck a new suspect out there? The McCanns have been so helpful and respectful to us we ought to do something for them?
Bizarrely, the McCanns PR, or should I say the McCanns BS, still dominates the English tabloids, who have taken a non story, and added pictures, and in the Sun's case a video, of a predator in a young English girl's bedroom. One tabloid, the Sun I believe, even claimed clinical psycholgists (yes several) have stated are not bothered about a child's gender. No names given of course, because it is absolute bollox, the experts I suspect, are the stooges khandola and Couzens who happily lie on behalf of the parents daily.
Clarence of course adds weight to the lie, as in 'phew this German guy could be just what we need to steer suspicion away from Gerry and Kate'. Not his exact words, but the words of a man now willing to clutch at any straw available.
13:54 Ros, Amaral came out of the blue to agree an interview with Mark S. A week before the anniversary. Is it likely that the story had been given to CdM with an embargo on it?
DeleteThanks Z. It is probably only illegal if it is a real line of enquiry.
DeleteAmusingly, The Telegraph has quoted Amaral as giving the name. He was very "emphatic" in refusing to give Mark S a name.
Rosalinda Hutton6 May 2019 at 13:54
DeleteWhen it comes to scoring on the inept scale, it's subjective.I'm often called cynical. I like that, though. Doesn't make me wrong does it.But this latest example of ineptitude is only the latest.It's all been inept since the day the PM decided the case required somebody to 'handle' the McCanns and the media output.man of us saw Mitchell's finest and most infamous moment years before the McCann case when he was at the BBC. ''Back to the studio'' and there was Clarence, open mouthed, closed eyes, snoring. Then fired.He's been napping along the way during this case too.But what us cynics saw from day one, many others are only beginning to see now because the more time that drags by, the more money that gets thrown about and the more leads that are false and transparently so, they are waking up.
As I said Re PJ dropping the ball early.If they had this man across a table years ago they must have had a reason to let him go again.Using him as bait to get an extension of funding was a mistake. If he turned out to be genuine they look incompetent, if he turned out to be a false alarm they look dishonest as they'd already given him the all clear.
As for the media. They know what sells papers or attracts eyes to their sites.It's business. Their agenda is profit, not justice.Too much credence is given to their opinions about too many things.Check their facts.How many do they ever print ? 75% ? I wish. It doesn't hit double figures and, as such, they don't matter in the grander scheme of anything.
Mitchell knows people are on to his nonsense. His real gift is the ability to keep a straight face and hold back the blushes.The biggest question for me has been how he's fooling the two intelligent people he's pretending to represent.They can't be that blind.And if it turns out to be the parents who are guilty, Mitchell would get a sentence as long as theirs and no politician in the UK would ever be trusted again.
Z
Hi Oscar, I don't think GA has 'come out of the blue', following the Netflix documentary, I suspect he is much in demand by investigative journalists.
DeleteAs a long serving detective, I expect GA does hear titbits about the current investigation, but who knows? Are the PJ using the media to mock Operation Grange? As in, these fools are looking at a suspect we discounted years ago? Or is GA telling the British, the British investigation is farce?
Those with the strongest motive to plant an abductor story are obviously the parents, particularly as it is anniversary time again, and there is still no sign of an abductor.
As for the funding issue for both police forces, I don't think for one second they have to produce a shapeshifter each time they need more money. The idea is absurd, neither reasoned nor logical. What were they funded for prior to the appearance of a 'new lead'? They have been funded for many years, Why, if they had nothing to investigate?
You are trying to connect issues that are totally unrelated, you are trying to imply that OG are sat around doing nothing. That they have exhausted every lead, and are merely waiting for something new to come in whilst receiving a regular pay cheque.
You are of course completely oblivious to how disrespectful you are being Z, and condescending of course, the reason most young men and women join the police is so they can sit around doing nothing.
And once more you are knocking Clarence Mitchell? Wassup? Has Clarence fallen out with Gerry? He is still speaking on their behalf, is it through gritted teeth? You seem to agree with what many have been saying about Clarence for years, ie, he is a paid liar. If that is the case why did the McCanns employ him? Why do they employ him still? Most people are able to speak for themselves, why can't they?
If the parents are guilty so is Mitchell you say. He would get a sentence as long as theirs. I don't know why you call him a politician though, he wasn't. He worked in Labour's media department as a spin doctor, prior to that he was a journalist. It is only in recently years that he tried his hand at politics and that was for the Tory Party.
I suspect Clarence, like Gerry and Kate, is serving that prison sentence now, he certainly looks affected by the stress. Unfortunately, that 'paid liar' reputation that runs rife throughout social media, cannot be good in the business he is in. Like Gerry and Kate he needs to be vindicated by the apprehension of an abductor. It is a bit sad for him actually, because the Madeleine case was the highlight of his career. He should have received accolades and awards for services to spin, and the media storm he created. Unfortunately his services to the McCanns have not aged well, nor his statements and videos. His moment in the spotlight is over, unless of course, he writes a memoir.....
Apologies Oscar, my reply to yourself, seems to have turned into a reply to Ziggy, apologies for the confusion.
DeleteDon't worry Ros, it all adds to the discourse.
DeleteI know he didn't come out of the blue. Mark S says that he has been chasing him for ages, and was quite surprised that Goncalo agreed to an interview.
DeleteIt was so unscheduled that, he had to postpone that weeks podcast. So, there was some urgency to get the thing out when they did.
In a convoluted way, I have come to the conclusion that the whole abductor thing has come from Mr Mitchell. It is so breathtakingly lazy and lacking in originality that it couldn't have come from anywhere else.
Unless, of course, it is a piss take by the PJ. I can't see them stooping to that level though. It wouldn't be seen as too funny by their masters in Lisbon.
So, Clarence briefs his shills in the UK media. One of them leaks to CdM, CdM leaks to Goncalo, Goncalo leaks to Channel 9.
End result is it sends out the message that the PJ are entertaining the abduction theory. What's in it for Amaral?
Clarence couldn't have come up with an abduction theory off the top of his head. it was already one before he was rushed in. he barely had time to take his politician's hat off and put his media monitoring one on.But he managed with seconds to spare and we're all kidded. We all believe he isn't really in the pockets of his masters.
DeleteHe would have been briefed by his string pullers if he was to control the media output. he'd have needed to know the story chapter and verse in case he was put on the spot. Forget Amaral and what he might get from it. Who briefed Mitchell ? That's the important question. The McCanns didn't order Mitchell off any menu. When Madeleine was abducted Mitchell was still in Whitehall.It was a politician or two that came up with the idea of freeing up his time and making him available.That asks an equally pertinent question, how did those who briefed Mitchel convince him to quit a full time job in Whitehall to take up a job as media monitor of a so called police matter which could be solved within a couple of days ? How did they know it wasn't gong to be a short term contract and it was actually going to be for the long haul.According to statistics, Madeleine, dead or alive, would have been found within a few weeks.Mitchell knew that. So how did he know in advance that this would defy the statistics ?
Z-
Rosalinda Hutton6 May 2019 at 15:24
Delete'' I don't think for one second they have to produce a shapeshifter each time they need more money. The idea is absurd, neither reasoned nor logical''
In your opinion. What are they doing with the funding then that's reasoned and logical ?
''They have been funded for many years, Why, if they had nothing to investigate?''
So mugs would believe they're investigating.
''You are of course completely oblivious to how disrespectful you are being Z, and condescending of course, the reason most young men and women join the police is so they can sit around doing nothing. ''
Ain't that the truth. OG are living proof of that.By the way, you shouldn't really call anyone condescending or disrespectful with your track record.
I have always said Mitchell is a paid liar. I just worded it differently.I suggested he was a politician planted on top of things for the reasons that politicians wanted him to.I also said he was keeping the McCanns in the dark while serving his real masters. You forget that. Your choice.You have your reasons.
You don't have a grasp of the way politicians operate . If you think Mitchell was chosen primarily for his media background and not his political and media contacts, you are, as usual, displaying stunning naivety.By the way. the Labour / Tory dichotomy is an illusion. It helps to maintain an illusion of choice and democracy.Blair showed you that as a Labour leader living by and implementing Tory policies.He just called it 'new'
''I suspect Clarence, like Gerry and Kate, is serving that prison sentence now, he certainly looks affected by the stress''
You think everyone involved in this case looks terrible due to a troubled conscience.I suppose you look as fresh today as you did 12 years ago.But if you use your imagination. you can see what you want to see I suppose.it's only true to you if you do that, though. Amaral doesn't look like a teenager lately either come to mention it..'sup with him I wonder :)
'' It is a bit sad for him actually, because the Madeleine case was the highlight of his career.''
In your opinion. Have you examined his full career ? I doubt that. It's too long winded. Remember, the Mccann case was always ostensibly just another ' media gig'. He was given a remit.Spin the facts, hide the real facts. He executed it to perfection.Ask the politicians who called him in.He holds a lot of secrets, does Clarence.
You can summarise Mitchell's role up in two words that satisfy both him and the politicians he's working for; ''mission accomplished''. It's only the parents he's let down. For what he's done in this particular job, he can write his own cheques.He won't be bothered about memoirs..
Z
So you have zero respect for the police, both Portuguese and British.
DeleteAnd, according to you, Clarence Mitchell is a master manipulator who duped the innocent parents in order to protect someone higher up the political chain.
I have to say it doesn't look as though he duped the parents, in the many appearances they made, there he was beside them like a best friend forever.
So how did he dupe them Z? Was he the mastermind behind everything they did? I find that hard to believe because they did quite a lot before he arrived on the scene. Why did he go from being in the pay of the Labour party, to being in the pay of the McCanns? Especially if he was continuing his work for the government, rather than the parents.
Clarence doesn't look anything like a man who can proudly say 'mission accomplished'. Frankly he looks as though he has had the wind knocked out of his sails and he is turning to liquor for solace. He may have convinced the world Madeleine was abducted, alongside the parents, but there has been no proof of an abduction in 12 years. The paradigm has shifted, the public are not so easily fooled, the PJ files are out there, the book of GA is out there, all easily accessible to anyone who is curious. The word of the official spokesman carries no weight, no-one believes him.
You imply he has been well rewarded financially for his 'mission accomplished', I would ask rewarded by who? Blair, Brown, Johnson, former new labour ministers, who in case you didn't notice, haven't been in power for a very long time.
Did the McCanns reward him? Unlikely, because it isn't mission accomplished for them. Even if the police aren't asking them questions, people all over the world are. They are under more suspicion now than they ever have been, ergo surgical mask man, promoted by the usual suspects and Clarence.
I'm bemused however that you are trying to distance the McCanns from Clarence, as if he were the villain of the piece, and I'll be interested to see how that pans out.
Rosalinda Hutton6 May 2019 at 22:14
Delete''So you have zero respect for the police, both Portuguese and British.''
A few points. It wasn't me who suggested( above) that they sit on the backsides all day. All i did was agree with you.As a general rule, respect needs to be earned as far as I'm concerned.You should command it not demand it.There is far too many examples of police incompetence and police corruption for them to be considered as anything generally.yes some will be doing the job for the right reasons and as a vocation. Many aren't. Many are on the take. They work hand in glove with gangsters for one as do certain politicians.I know that as a fact. But with regard to this case, where have any of the police of either country earned any respect ?
''So how did he dupe them Z? Was he the mastermind behind everything they did? ''
What did they do ?
'' Why did he go from being in the pay of the Labour party, to being in the pay of the McCanns? Especially if he was continuing his work for the government, rather than the parents.''
That's a bigger mystery than the case itself.We had a police matter in it's embryonic stage. yet Prime Minister Blair, MI6 and a political spin doctor were being rushed in to 'control ' information.It was supposed to be a police investigation.My question is why CM would leave an easy well paid job to take a job that could have been over in 48 hours. Who knew it wouldn't be ? You ask the wrong questions.
You make so many judgements and assessments based on looks. You see a face and give us all the innermost workings og the mind behind it.You struggle with facts we have, don't deal with ones that nobody has found yet.
''You imply he has been well rewarded financially for his 'mission accomplished', I would ask rewarded by who''
Whoever it is, he isn't having to ask anyone to lend him a few quid.I have asked several times when posting on your blog how the two opposing major political parties have been united over the funding of this case so willingly even though it's gone nowhere.I told you in a previous post that the two-party system is mainly an illusion.They all answer to one party. yet you say :
'' Blair, Brown, Johnson, former new labour ministers, who in case you didn't notice, haven't been in power for a very long time. ''
You don't pay enough attention.
I doubt the McCanns rewarded him. I suspect they don't even trust him.They have to trust too many people who have done nothing in the way of finding their child.yet all of them are sticking like glue to the abduction story and precluding the parents when it comes to blame.That situation is the nub of the whole Mccann mystery.
I have long said that GM has given the impression that he isn't CM's biggest fan and his demanding of a fresh investigation ( to Cameron) seemed to be a spill over of that.A missing child isn't a media circus or a show.In this case, it hasn't been a police investigation either.All we learn that's 'new' is the amount the fund will be receiving and leads- as i've been telling you for a long, long time, we should never expect to develop into anything once the funds in the hip pocket.That was foresight. Today it's news.
Z
Daily Telegraph 9 May 2011 Cassandra Jardine
ReplyDelete"Another possible suspect is Martin Ney, 40, who last month was arrested for the murder of Dennis Klein, a nine-year-old who vanished on a school trip in Germany in 2001. Ney resembles the photofit of the man seen carrying a child by one of the Tapas Seven, shortly before Madeleine’s bed was found empty"
New suspect or Kandohla bollocks?.
It doesn't say much for the investigation skills of O.G. or the PJ if true.
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/madeleine-mccann-suspect-martin-ney-paedophile-police-investigation-a8900256.html
Delete"Portuguese police have expanded the probe into the 2007 disappearance of the British girl from a resort in Praia da Luz after receiving new details about the case from Scotland Yard.
Detectives are believed to have identified Martin Ney – a 48-year-old imprisoned in Germany in 2012 for murdering three children and sexually abusing dozens of others – as a suspect.
London's Metropolitan Police passed fresh information to Portuguese colleagues about a “foreign paedophile” who was in Portugal in May 2007, the Lisbon-based Expresso newspaper reported last week."
----------
Jun 16, 2007
http://themaddiecasefiles.com/madeleine-mccann-mom-an-activist-may-fight-child-1-t16839.html
"Now mom may use her time towards activism, stung by the loss of her girl. Kate McCann may give up her job as a doctor to campaign against child trafficking and raise awareness about missing children, reports the Times UK.
Kate and Gerry McCann are said to be alarmed that child trafficking is not taken seriously enough. Kate, 38, is now considering leaving her job as a GP to campaign full-time. A family friend said: "They have come to realize that this is a major issue. If they can act as figureheads then that's all well and good." Her plans come after meeting child welfare groups and politicians on trips to European capitals."
I had to look.....
DeleteI'm guessing the met and PJ have put their heads together and come up with a clever investigative tool - Wikipedia.
That's right, German chappy has a Wikipedia page. There's a sketch that makes the McCann efits look like Da Vnci's finest hour. That 'mask' doesn't look like a surgeon's mask to me.It looks like a really tall sparrow- about 6 foot- is wearing a tack suit.Or that he's a reject from the black and white minstrels show circa decades ago.It's hilarious. I'm no artist, but I could do better using an etch-a-sketch.
But a good copper will always smell the clues. Especially when tracking a serial offender.And, as the page says, he seems to work on a three year cycle; 1992 1995 1998 2001 and 2004. Guess what comes next in that sequence...
His computer was confiscated years ago but he only gave the police a password in 2016. They are still analysing it.He has a long list of convictions against boys ( not girls) much older than Madeleine. He had a spell of teaching children somewhere too. He seems to have operated in Germany and The Netherlands. But for the sake of the latest funding, he prefers little girls in Portugal.They have plenty of hid DNA samples if the OG crew have bothered to preserve any from PDL.
I see some weird parallels with that odd ball John Mark Karr of the JonBenet Ramsey case .
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Ney
Z
I wonder where the McCanns' twins fit in to all this nonsense, you can't tell me they haven't been trawling the internet ever since they were able to get their hands on any device possible.
ReplyDeleteWhat have they been searching, what have they overheard in the last 12 years at living at home with their parents, family members talking out of ear shot although perhaps they weren't out of ear shot. It's uncanny what very young children can hear and remember even from a very young age and recall something that may trigger a memory in later years.
I was very young, probably about 8 years old when I heard my mother and her sister talking about their other sister, they were discussing her having married her present husband when he already had another family elsewhere. I was too young at that age to say anything to my cousins and then lost touch with them so forgot about it for some years but it still sticks in my memory even after 50+ years.
Why can't we tell you they haven't been trawling the internet ? You're only having a guess aren't you. You imagine they do it so that's enough for you.Not only that but whenever they get near a device as though they're obsessed. That's quite an imagination.And quite a McCann prejudice. You ask what they've been searching.Who said they were ? They are 13 or 14 years old.maybe they're trying to get an education. maybe they watch youtube and talk to their friends.
ReplyDelete''It's uncanny what very young children can hear and remember even from a very young age and recall something that may trigger a memory in later years.''
Now you're a fly on the McCann wall witnessing the family accidentally saying too much and being heard by the kids.
What happened in your house you can talk about.You were there and it was your life.That doesn't mean it happens to everyone does it
Anon 6 May 01.02
DeleteHave I hit a nerve? I'm only suggesting what the twins may do if they are curious about how Madeleine "disappeared". You don't seem to be too curious or do you know?
Why shouldn't the twins find out what "really" happened to Madeleine. After all they only have the word of their parents that she was "abducted", the dogs say otherwise.
It will be up to them or not whether they want to find out the truth, time will tell. Although it can't be hidden from them for ever, they must have to see the news on TV at every anniversary, walk past newspaper shops with headlines about Madeleine's "disappearance" staring them in the face.
I'm only pointing out the obvious.
Anonymous6 May 2019 at 18:10
DeleteHave you hit a nerve ? Yes, very much so.How did you guess.
What you suggested was a scene from your own past. Children overhearing their parents saying something they'd rather their children didn't hear.Then the children springing into sleuth mode to trawl the internet to see the real truth of what their parents were keeping secret.It's 100% pure imagination but manages to maintain the guilt of the parents. It's ridiculous.
''You don't seem to be too curious or do you know?''
Yes, I know. I was hiding in the drinks cabinet listening to the kids listening to their parents. You're good at this.
Nobody said the kids shouldn't know what happened to their sister.You did.But, in case you haven't ever followed the reality of the case, nobody knows yet.The dogs said woof and bark.
You think the truth can't be hidden from the kids forever as they might switch on the TV and hear it on the news. Have you any idea how mad you sound ?You think that's even close to something likely ?
''I'm only pointing out the obvious.''
Yes, I can see that. I don't know how this has remained a mystery for so long with internet sleuths like you on the case.Or whatever else you're on.
Anon 6 May 19.18
DeleteYou're making yourself sound ridiculous.
The dogs said "woof and bark", good grief, they are very frightening aren't they to you and who ever you're trying to protect. Never under estimate the dogs, the FBI took them on, so were the FBI conned that they took on useless dogs. You tell me.
Anonymous6 May 2019 at 22:00
Delete'they are very frightening aren't they to you and who ever you're trying to protect''
Have you any idea at all how deranged you sound.
You are not Neo or Keanu Reeves and there isn't a red or blue pill. This is not the matrix.I am not agent Smith.You are far too immersed into the internet. Come back some time. maybe we can chat then.
''Never under estimate the dogs, the FBI took them on, so were the FBI conned that they took on useless dogs. You tell me.''
DeleteI just Googled. The FBI haven't been involved in the case. Sorry
Martin Grime had a temporary contract with the FBI amongst other agencies, his contract lasted from 2010-2014. I can find no record of Eddie and Keela working alongside him in the US, and not sure when the dogs died.
DeleteThere's far too much repeated speculation and guesswork in this case, and always has been.
It's time people did their own research, and believe nothing until they've checked it out for themselves to their own personal satisfaction.
The dogs are a massive distraction...that's all. The internet can't see it, and perhaps it never will.
Anon 6 May 22.37
DeleteI didn't say that the FBI were involved in Madeleine's "disappearance", although you know that. They took Eddie & Keela to the US to use on some of their own cases and to see how they could train their own dogs to be up to their standard.
Anon 6 May 22.35
Please don't patronise me. I'm not deranged but the people who go out of their way to protect the McCanns and forget that Madeleine ever existed seem to be the ones "deranged" as you put it. Madeleine, remember her? She's the victim, not the McCanns, don't ever forget that.
You can find no evidence of Martin Grime working in the US eh?
DeleteI suggest you read up on the trial of D'Andre Lane who was convicted of killing his two year old daughter Bianca, on the alerts of Martin Grime's dogs. There was no body, but the indication of death by the dogs was enough to see him jailed for life.
It is an interesting case, there are even clips of Martin Grime testifying in Court that his dogs alerted to only one car in a warehouse of 30, Mr. Lane's car, the dog barked which is a positive alert. Sounds similar to the dogs alerting to the McCanns hire car, and no other, and alerting in the McCanns apartment, and no other.
D'Andre Lane was convicted and sentenced to life in prison, the Judge and Jury accepted the alerts of the dogs.
Anonymous7 May 2019 at 00:47
Delete''Please don't patronise me. I'm not deranged but the people who go out of their way to protect the McCanns and forget that Madeleine ever existed seem to be the ones "deranged" as you put it.''
Hello 'not deranged'. can you point out anything at all in any of your last three posts that would back up your claim that you're not deranged please. failing that, can you offer me something in the way of proof that me or anyone at all who posts on this or any other blog is 'protecting' a McCann ?You seem to have had a fantasy and enjoyed it. Now you think it's real so you're blaming people who haven't a clue what the hell you're on about.
''Madeleine, remember her? She's the victim, not the McCanns, don't ever forget that.''
You are a fool
Rosalinda Hutton7 May 2019 at 01:15
Delete''You can find no evidence of Martin Grime working in the US eh?''
Of course I can. Anyone can with Google. I even saw the dogs in question appearing on the american crime channel last year in an episode of 'the american ripper'. But the conversation here was about Madeleine McCann and what happened to her in PDL, Portugal.I see no evidence of the FBI being involved. Do keep up.
''D'Andre Lane was convicted and sentenced to life in prison, the Judge and Jury accepted the alerts of the dogs.''
Deleteemail the PJ and tell them they have enough to build a case for the prosecution.
I'm sure the PJ and the Portuguese Judiciary know all about the D'Andre Lane case 15:00, it is far more significant than, say, Gerry's statement that the dogs are notoriously unreliable.
DeleteLane also claimed his daughter was kidnapped, taken when he was carjacked and she was sitting in the child seat in the back. when the car was recovered the dogs alerted to the smell of death on the car seat. Lane had actually put the child's poor broken body in the car seat to carry out his illusion.
You really ought to read up on the case 15:00, it is very informative about the work of Grime's dogs, and their valuable contribution that helped the police solve this murder. The police weren't looking for anyone else after the dogs were brought in, no pretend searching, no pretend new leads, and no pretend age progression pics. I don't think any ambassadors turned up to assist Lane, and it's doubtful the President (then Obama) asked the police to go easy on him. And of course, he wasn't made an ambassador himself, that only happens in the UK. I'm also pretty certain that the police in the US didn't assist him to raise funds for himself or give him a standing ovation. Again, that's a UK thing.
Anon 7 May 13.38
DeleteNo, I'm not a fool although the McCanns think we are.
I have a brain, and I use it, I don't go by what the McCanns say however much they plead "abduction", I was never convinced from 3rd May 2007 when Gerry McCann had to read from a script about his missing daughter, not felt from the heart, oh no, was that because he didn't want to trip up and say the wrong thing, then we have Kate McCann who took the twins to the nursery on Sunday 6th May (opened up especially for her) as she said "she wanted to keep things "normal" for them", yes, said with hundreds of TV reporters and cameras flashing in their faces, two little tiny kids being dragged into the front of the world's press. Is that what they had every day in Rothley? How did she not know if one of the staff had "abducted" Madeleine and was a "pedo" keeping her nearby and putting her through hell, well of course she didn't have to worry as she knew what had happened to her daughter.
Call me a fool again if you want, but who is fooling who?
Rosalinda Hutton7 May 2019 at 16:26
Delete''I'm sure the PJ and the Portuguese Judiciary know all about the D'Andre Lane case 15:00, it is far more significant than, say, Gerry's statement that the dogs are notoriously unreliable.''
I believe Gerry is a cardiologist. In the case, they didn't ask his opinion as they had a police expert with years of experience behind him. Are you trying to say that he was wrong by not advising the PJ to act on the dog alerts ? What's your experience ? You have a blog and you want to see the parents go to jail. That's about it.For the dog expert to see things the way you do, he'd have to suddenly have a lapse of memory and invent some new technique and new criteria if he wants to make everything fit to blame the parents.
''You really ought to read up on the case 15:00, it is very informative about the work of Grime's dogs, and their valuable contribution that helped the police solve this murder''
It was Grime who investigate this case with his dogs wasn't it ? If he was actually involved with his dogs in solving that murder, don't you think he'd have had that in his mind. ? Why wouldn't he use that as a reference to suggest guilt of the parents or that it was evidence of the death of their child ? Because he was being paid not to maybe ? Or he suddenly forgot all of his experience that day ?Or he lied ?
Have you looked at the Zapata case ? If a defence counsel tells a jury that dogs alerts are 100 % trustworthy, or even 95% then fair enough.If it's less they'll tell the jury it's reasonable doubt that they're accurate.
''...The judge agreed with an analysis of the three dogs’ track record by Zapata’s defence team that found they were incorrect 78 per cent, 71 per cent and 62 per cent of the time...''
http://dogsdontlie.com/main/2008/12/cadaver-dogs-how-reliable-are-they-at-detecting-death/
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2007/09/can-you-trust-a-cadaver-dog-if-there-s-no-cadaver.html
Anonymous6 May 2019 at 23:23
DeleteMaybe the dogs are a distraction. Or maybe the evidence has been contaminated on purpose. Maybe they(OG) would rather it wasn't subjected to more stringent analysis.But they've been only theoretical now for 12 years. If anything was going to come of them , it would have happened a long time ago. I've said this many times for a long time. The usual 'rebuttal' is that they're being kept on ice until there are further advances made in DNA analysis . I sneered at that suggestion as a final lifeline for the antis to cling on to. Now we learn that those wished for advances have existed for a while.Further, we have learned that a world renowned Doctor has offered to analyse the evidence. His offer has been rejected. Or it's been ignored, which amounts to the same, casting further doubt on the actual existence of the DNA let alone it's validity. The OG had their bluff called. If it was a poker game they'd be walking home now.If OG are refusing to produce the evidence and accept offers to run it through more stringent tests, it contradicts the 'no stone unturned' meme. It also throws suspicion on their case for requesting further funding if they have ignored an actual real development in the case-ie, the final analysis of the dog alerts.It all seems to suggest they have no evidence any more, or they aren't bothered about it. Or, maybe it's important to them that it isn't analysed properly. It might speak of someone they'd rather it didn't. That rules the parents out as suspects as if it gave that away, it wouldn't send shock waves anywhere in high places and the public wouldn't faint with fright.It would have to be someone far more important who is supposed to be a pillar of society and a trusted public figure.
Z
Anonymous7 May 2019 at 16:57
Delete''No, I'm not a fool although the McCanns think we are.''
I or we ?
You didn't trust GM because he read from a script. I've seen thousands of people do that outside courts and at press releases in similar circumstances. They have statements prepared by lawyers or media people or family liaison people. It's hard to be spontaneous on the spot when you're distressed. Or, you could read something else into it if you feel like playing let's pretend.KM wanted to try to keep things normal because she had to infants to think about.That's wrong ? I suppose so if we're still playing let's pretend, or imagine if.
Hoe did she know a 'pedo' didn't have her child ? She didn't know. She couldn't know.But you say she did know that one didn't because she'd already killed her herself.
''Call me a fool again if you want, but who is fooling who?''
OK you're a fool. And you're fooling yourself.
The only fool around here Z is you if you think the alerts of the dogs and the forensic evidence collected has been discarded. That will never happen. Take a minute and let that sink in. These weren't just any old dogs, they were specialist dogs trained by Scotland Yard. The blood and cadaver dogs reacted to what they are trained to react to. You may mock the idea of a woof or a bark - but these are positive reactions to the presence of blood and cadaverine.
DeleteYou say the dogs are a massive distraction - a distraction from what? the phantom abductor, is that who we should be talking about?
The dog alerts will be integral to trial of this case no matter what the outcome. Even if a stranger abductor is found, his actions will have to 'fit the alerts of the dogs.
You say the police are afraid to have the forensic evidence independently tested because the DNA may reveal a 'shock' VIP (Cliff? Clement?) that will rock the establishment. Do behave, Cliff is pretty nimble (all that tennis), but I can't see him loitering around PDL stalking families on holiday. The same applies Clement, in fact more so, he was knocking on a bit and far from nimble, certainly not capable of climbing in a bedroom window.
You seem certain the evidence has been contaminated - are you trying to pre-empt anything that comes out? I know the pros like to promote the idea that the evidence was planted, the blood specks, the smells etc, but there is no feasible way that could have happened.
Contaminated after? Who knows, one minute we had Martin Brunt saying there was a 100% match to Madeleine's DNA, then there wasn't. It is possible, 12 years on, the forensic evidence has been deciphered, that is, they do not need members of the public offering to assist them.
But the DNA results in themselves don't really prove anything. The blood specks for example, Madeleine had been in the apartment for nearly a week, maybe she had a nose bleed. It is the DNA in the boot of the car the McCanns hired 3 weeks later, that is the problem.
What you are hoping for Z, and I don't think it will ever happen, is that 'new' fingerprints or 'new' DNA (the DNA of a stranger)will be uncovered by the forensics. That however, would have been on the front pages of the newspapers years ago, not least because it would have been proof of an abductor. The crime scene is now preserved in time, nothing can be added, nothing can be taken away.
The police have said nothing about the investigation, nothing about discarding the alerts of the dogs and the forensics collected, all that is wishful thinking on your part Ziggy.
Rosalinda Hutton7 May 2019 at 19:58
Delete''The only fool around here Z is you if you think the alerts of the dogs and the forensic evidence collected has been discarded. That will never happen. Take a minute and let that sink in.''
I questioned the alerts of the dogs.I raised questions about them. I raised questions about why they haven't been used for anything in 12 years and why OG haven't accepted offers to analyse their findings if they really want this case solved. All valid questions that need answers.Take 60 minutes and try to understand that.
''You say the dogs are a massive distraction - a distraction from what? the phantom abductor, is that who we should be talking about?''
I see you have the usual attention span in charge of your judgement today. I didn't say it, somebody else said it and I replied to it.
''The dog alerts will be integral to trial of this case no matter what the outcome. ''
They won't.They can't be. Because if they're ever advanced as 'proof' every detective involved in the case will be questioned about their reluctance to ever use it as evidence to make an arrest for all those years.
''You say the police are afraid to have the forensic evidence independently tested because the DNA may reveal a 'shock' VIP (Cliff? Clement''
I think your shallow existence and infatuation with celebrity is painful to witness. I didn't say 'VIP'.I didn't name anybody. You have. For the record, Clement's dead and wasn't in office when he died.Cliff is a singer, allegedly.'Public figures' aren't celebrities who had hit singles or appeared on big brother.They hold important positions .
''You seem certain the evidence has been contaminated - are you trying to pre-empt anything that comes out?''
You read '' maybe it's been contaminated'' and quote it as ''you seem certain''. You have very poor comprehension skills.
'' I know the pros like to promote the idea that the evidence was planted, the blood specks, the smells etc, but there is no feasible way that could have happened.''
I have stated that I'm neither pro nor anti and what i say backs that up.But only to anyone with basic -or better -comprehension skills.For the record-where did i mention 'planted evidence' ? or are you trying to suggest i meant that.Straw man nonsense again..
Nobody cares what Brunt said. He isn't a detective and wasn't investigating the case.He was reporting it.Often incorrectly on behalf of his paymasters.
''But the DNA results in themselves don't really prove anything.''
And still wouldn't.They need further, deeper analysis and corroborating evidence. Still think they'd be pivotal in a trial ? I don't think so, somehow..
''What you are hoping for Z, and I don't think it will ever happen, is that 'new' fingerprints or 'new' DNA (the DNA of a stranger)will be uncovered by the forensics''
Don't attempt the mind reading until you've mastered some basics.I'm hoping they identify whether Madeleine is dead or alive and if anyone is identified as responsible for it. Failing that, responsible for being in the apartment prior to an abduction.I don't care who it is.An abductor, a freak or a McCann.I want justice for the child not revenge because i'm bitter and have an agenda competing with an obsession for my mind
''The police have said nothing about the investigation, nothing about discarding the alerts of the dogs and the forensics collected, all that is wishful thinking on your part Ziggy. ''
No, the police have said nothing about the case.They've said nothing about the dogs alerts.They haven't said why they are not taking up offers of a more advanced analysis either.They aren't wishes from anyone. They're actual facts ( look it up).
Z
"The police have said nothing about the investigation, nothing about discarding the alerts of the dogs and the forensics collected, all that is wishful thinking on your part Ziggy"
DeleteOG and the PJ have both stated times the Mccanns are not suspects and thereby do not attach any credence to the dog alerts.
The alerts have no evidential value whatsoever and it would require police officers to pursue this line of enquiry which they have already ruled out .
That leaves who exactly to investigate and prosecute, ah yes... It was the Mccanns what done it brigade.
Blimey, bruv Z, I take my tinfoil helmet off to Liverpool, I do. Do-do-do, la-la-lee. Delighted that Jurga, at last, had had taken your thoughts into account. Mazel tov!
DeleteMy yesterday’s two-word one-liner didn’t make it to the blog - another cee. All my troubles seem so far away. I’ve been thinking of retiring.
Further to your 7 May 2019 at 21:14 post:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khP0dEsZaug
Forensic expert professor David Barclay at 30:42: “Remember forensic science is not just a single test result, it’s setting it I context. So, if you get a result that seems to indicate one thing, you’d want to confirm it by other tests from other areas.”
Also, would you know where “the blood specks” were found? I don’t remember any.
T (aka Pooh etc.) ()
I actually scored 'Genius' level when tested in clinical conditions Z, so you attempts to portray me as 'not understanding' really are desperate. I understand just fine, enough to explain it all simply, do you?
DeleteMy 'shallow existence and infatuation with celebrity', err, it isn't me trying to introduce someone famous who needs to be protected, that would be you. I was in fact mocking your batshit crazy theory with my references to Cliff and Clement. I think 'someone too important to prosecute' is another desperate attempt to steer suspicion away from the parents.
No-one is above the Law Ziggy, not the Royals, not the politicians, not even senior police officers. But I see your difficulty, if there is no abductor of the spotty, smelly or ugly variety, they're f*cked. So about turn, It must be someone from the other end of the economic scale, so important that the entire British establishment and 30+ homicide detectives are lying to protect him.
That Ziggy is probably the most pathetic theory ever advanced by Team McCann. I could dismantle it in a million ways but I can't be arsed, it's just another time waster.
Rosalinda Hutton8 May 2019 at 12:01
Delete''I actually scored 'Genius' level when tested in clinical conditions Z, so you attempts to portray me as 'not understanding' really are desperate''
Check what you wrote and check what I wrote. It's all there.
''My 'shallow existence and infatuation with celebrity', err, it isn't me trying to introduce someone famous who needs to be protected, that would be you.''
I speculated about a 'public figure' in office who needed protection from high up. You interpreted that as Cliff Richard the singer.
''That Ziggy is probably the most pathetic theory ever advanced by Team McCann. I could dismantle it in a million ways but I can't be arsed, it's just another time waster.''
It would also require an open mind, a lack of obsessive bias and an actual understanding of the subject.It's probably just as well you 'can't be arsed' really isn't it. Stick to the one narrow view that has no evidence apart from ' they just look the type'. Deep thinking..
Z
''No-one is above the Law Ziggy, not the Royals, not the politicians, not even senior police officers. But I see your difficulty, if there is no abductor of the spotty, smelly or ugly variety, they're f*cked''
DeleteYou do love your little stereotypes don't you. What does the stereotypical procurer look like then. Do tell.
Anonymous8 May 2019 at 10:50
DeleteComrade. A good night was had by all last night. I actually passed the team around 4.30 yesterday and sent positive vibes through to Killperty and the lads.I did a Uri Geller type 'number 4....number 4...'' Lemon squeezy as they say.
Blood specks....hmm....
I have no idea. Going by this blog there was specks and 'spatter'. A positive blood bath they all seen on photographs. Eben though the leader of the pack, Amaral, said he had to use a microscopic analysis of samples found underneath a floor tile. But such claims of specks n spatter make a good story. Don't you watch TV for heaven's sake :)
I tend to separate reality and TV and movies if the subject's serious.It helps clarity of thought.It's quite fashionable in the halls of Academia. dee-do-dat-der-do-dont-dee-doh..
Z
Rosalinda Hutton May 2019 at 12:01
DeleteNobody is above the law you say.Would you like a list of politicians or their middle men who have received protection from the police on the orders of the politicians ? I can give you one if you like.
Carole Malone joining the circus again today on Twitter. Obviously been reading the comments on newspapers.
ReplyDeleteRegrettably most focus on the neglect aspect, which of course reinforces abduction. It's like Groundhog Day at times.
Regrettably she playing the politics of envy card, not so much that the investigation is wrong, but that they are getting special treatment.
Very little questioning what a crock this latest scary man story is.
wish carloe malone would wear a mask
DeleteCarole Malone always plays the politics of envy, it's kind of her thing. She brings to mind a sneering mean girl gang member, egging the others on to bully the pretty girl. In fact that's exactly how she behaved in the Big Brother House, ganging up on the beautiful Indian actress. She is a truly sick, nasty individual, I don't know why anyone listens to what she says.
Deletehttp://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/SEX_OFFENDERS_INFORMATION.htm#p13p3981
ReplyDelete"INFORMATION
Concerning the information in Folios 293 - 300, I can inform you that in spite having carefully explored and analysed with minute detail, nothing useful was found of interest to the investigation. In spite of the individuals mentioned having criminal pasts linked to illegal practices of a sexual nature, no relation was detected with the disappearance of the British child, Madeleine McCann.
Portimao, 2nd November 2007
Inspector
Joao Carlos"
Thank you for that quote 08:55, it is good to be reminded that the Portuguese police have already investigated these so called new leads put forward by the tabloids.
DeleteI'm amazed the Portuguese police never hit back at these ridiculous stories, but I guess they don't have, they hold they hold the winning hand.
''I'm amazed the Portuguese police never hit back at these ridiculous stories, but I guess they don't have, they hold they hold the winning hand''
Delete12 years on they're asking for more money for more than one suspect. Lies again. But when they arrest one of them I'll be proven wrong I suppose.Like that's going to happen.Great way to play a winning hand, PJ.Well done. Now get back to the investigation and actually do something.
I'd like to know which of the many efits had a man wearing a mask
ReplyDeleteQuick question there is a mention of Kate's uncle Brian Kennedy. Is this the same Brian Kennedy who financed the PI's? If so I didn't realise they were relayed.
ReplyDeleteNo John100, there are two people with the name Brian Kennedy, one which is a Cheshire-based business man who did finance the so-called PI's, and Kate's uncle, and brother of her mother.
DeleteHope that helps.
P
John100, the Cheshire based businessman might have had the word "discredited invented for him". Long track record of trying to get involved in football clubs.
DeleteStockport County will regret they ever let him in the door. Ran them into the ground.
Sporting events are excellent ways to launder money. So are charities. Not that I am suggesting he has done anything illegal.
Hi John1006 May 2019 at 14:57 and Hi P 6 May 2019 at 16:04
DeleteThis is the uncle anyway.
Mrs McCann’s uncle Brian Kennedy added: “If police start broadcasting names of suspects, it will only send them running.”
Mirror 6 May 2019-05-06 by
Gerard Couzens
Yes, she really ought to know what happens to people who come under suspicion. They run as fast as the can away from the authorities, that suspect them, just like She and Gerry did in 2007.
So where did they run to ? The police in England are investigating the case too remember. Any answer ?
DeleteHi Anon 6 May 2019 at 22:01
Delete"So where did they run to ?"
They fled from the only country where there was an ongoing investigation, especially concerning the suspicion about their own involvement in Madeleine's disappearance.
As you may know, they left PDL in a haste just two days after they'd been heard as arguidos.
At that time they couldn't possibly have known that the Met/SY would take on the case 3 or 4 years later. So they ran away because they were suspects and didn't want to answer any more "stupid" questions by the "incompetent" Portuguese police detectives. They were given a chance to prove their innocence, but didn't take it, as they cleverly managed to get away from a reconstruction,in which the PJ asked them to participate. They sabotaged the investigation about their own guilt or innocence by promoting "the search-for-Madeleine-alive-hidden- somewhere-by-a-paedophile story, and there we still are today.
( a tumbleweed moment)
DeleteBjörn7 May 2019 at 16:40
Deletebjorn you're trying to portray the parents as persons of interest and number one suspects under investigation. If they fled as though on the run they'd have been met by UK officers at the airport. The PJ would have made the call ahead of them landing. They would also have advised the parents not to leave the country.They could even have put them under arrest and held on to their passports until they were satisfied they were innocent. None of these things happened did they ? They didn't have to prove their innocence. The police had to prove their guilt.The police didn't. So they remained innocent. They didn't sabotage any investigation. Tell me where any file says they did and tell me who said they did apart from you.
anon 17:23 (a tumble weed moment.)
Delete...............................
Secured to it is the abduction theory.
Hi Anon 7 May 2019 at 17:50
Delete"They didn't sabotage any investigation. Tell me where any file says they did and tell me who said they did apart from you"
They contaminated the crime scene by letting all their friends, including the Warner staff run around in their apartment, they published a photo of Madeleine,though the PJ asked them to do so, as it might have put Madeleine in an even more dangerous situation in case she'd been abducted, they didn't participate in the planned reconstruction,as I've mentioned so many times, they all sat down working on a mutual time sheet, so that they would not contradict one another when they later were going to give their personal statements about what happened, Kate refused to answer any of the 48 questions that she was asked as an arguido. Finally by just going home telling the world that the PJ aren't doing their job properly and then start an investigation of their own, despite the fact that they'd accepted and endorsed the shelving of the Portuguese investigation, were all blatant destructive actions with the aim of sabotaging any attempt by the PJ to further investigate them.
Tut tut 17:50, haven't you read Kate@s book? She herself describes leaving PDL as a fleeing situation. She and Gerry had discussed getting in the car with the twins and crossing the border.
DeleteThat's the thing with telling lies 17:50, you have to have a really good memory. As Mark Twain said 'if you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything'.
Was she referring to fleeing the media circus or running away from the police. I don't think she'd write it in her book if she meant the latter.Do you ? How desperate are you trying that one lol
DeleteBjörn7 May 2019 at 19:50
Delete''They contaminated the crime scene by letting all their friends, including the Warner staff run around in their apartment, ''
You're implying threat they did that deliberately.You aren't capable of any empathy. Too much hate in you. If you went back and your child had disappeared would you be calm, collected and cold and tell everyone to stay out of the crime scene ? Yes, of course you would.You don't lie do you.That's really normal isn't it. The police didn't do any better with the crime scene and it wasn't even their child.No blame for them though i notice.
If they had done anything wrong to their daughter, why would they worry about endangering her by publishing a photograph ? If they knew she was dead it didn't matter.They wanted everyone to keep an eye open for her.Your claim about the reconstruction is complete rubbish. Tell me how it would have helped the investigation.They knew they were going to be questioned about who was where and when so it made sense to work on a time sheet as wrong information or conflicting times could make the investigation go awry.You want it to be a gang of paedophiles getting their stories straight. It's all you ever do.''Abuse and death'' like a sick parrot on every blog you contaminate.
The PJ had their lines of inquiry, as well as plenty of imaginative scenarios their chief had drawn up in his head.They still failed to get anywhere.But to criticise them is wrong ? If they messed up an investigation of your own child and you found out their chief had been found guilty of perjury in a different missing child case would you praise them or criticise them ?
Kate McCann (madeleine):
Delete"On the drive home from the police station it had become clear to Gerry that Carlos believed charges were likely and that we might have to stay in Portugal. The preparation of a case like this could take years. If the charge was murder, rather than the lesser crime of hiding a body, we might even be remanded in custody for all that time. Given the lack of evidence, it was impossible to understand how such charges could be brought, but if you’d told us a few weeks earlier that we were going to be declared arguidos we wouldn’t have believed that, either. The prospect of being separated from Sean and Amelie, holed up in jail unable to prepare our defence properly, was terrifying. Gerry was seriously considering sneaking us into a car and driving us all across the border to Spain. It would have been crazy. The whole world would have thought we were guilty, and maybe that was what the police were hoping we’d do."
So Gerry 'was considering' fleeing the police. One child missing and the two that were still in the family woke up to a circus full of police , cameras and lights and questions and no big sister. The parents considered the fear of their two children then not knowing where their parents were as well as their sister.So the reaction was to run and keep them close. Yes, that makes them murderers and pyschopaths.
DeleteBy the ay, what did the PJ do once they found their 'suspects' had fled the country ?They must have been really annoyed by that. Did they charge them with anything or were they not that bothered. Unlike internet sleuths are.
Hi Anon 7 May 2019 at 21:37
DeleteKate McCann (madeleine):
"Gerry was seriously considering sneaking us into a car and driving us all across the border to Spain"
Instead they sneaked into a taxi and left Portugal by a plane. Not so much different from driving across the border to another country, I'd say. Kate's book is nothing but an embedded confession of a serious crime, besides she's documented her and Gerry's inner thoughts, which so clearly reveal their narcisstic attitudes and behaviour"
Anon 7 May 2019 at 20:51
Delete"If you went back and your child had disappeared would you be calm, collected and cold and tell everyone to stay out of the crime scene ?"
If I would've known that an abductor had been in the apartment, which Kate says she knew right away, who couldn't be further away than 20 minutes, but possibly just seconds away, which she also must've known, I'd have asked people to run in all direction to catch him/her and also run myself crying out MADELEINE. I'd then perhaps have forgotten about telling people not to contiminate the crime scene, but Kate did not search for Madeleine that night. Still she was cold enough to close the alleged open window, call her parents in England, look up the number to the priest of the Anglican church in PDL and call him. She was, just like Gerry, perfectly rational in everything that she did, including the praying Arab charades. It was just a question of priority when she and Gerry chose not to seal off their apartment.
PS
I'm not a hater, but I try to see the McCanns for what they're, but not as they say that they are.
Björn @09:33
Delete“Instead they sneaked into a taxi and left Portugal by a plane.”
There was no ‘sneaking’: the Portuguese authorities had said the McCanns were free to leave Portugal. No restrictions apart from an undertaking to return for a reconstruction.
T
Yes, it's an embedded confession. You spotted what two police forces have been missing for 12 years.You and that nutter who Richard Hall loves.
DeleteAnonymous8 May 2019 at 12:04
Delete'' the Portuguese authorities had said the McCanns were free to leave Portugal. ''
So another myth bites the dust. Maybe the PJ told them they were 'free to flee' lol
Björn8 May 2019 at 12:01
DeleteYou are stretching beyond feasible limits to try and persuade people to buy into something you've imagined and tried to imagine that you'd do in an experience that is already completely alien to you and 99.9% of people. Too many 'must haves'.
Who do we call when we fear our world is falling apart, bjorn ? Mum is almost always the first call-even for men.If you have a faith, you call your local Priest /Vicar and so on.That's normal behaviour.But, because Kate exhibits it, you want us to suspend common sense just for this occasion so we can have something to hold against her. Let's rad here actions and interpret a secret meaning nobody can prove.
''She was, just like Gerry, perfectly rational in everything that she did, including the praying Arab charades.''
See what I mean ? Arab charades ?
''PS
I'm not a hater, but I try to see the McCanns for what they're, but not as they say that they are.''
That doesn't really hold water. You analyse every aspect of every move they made and every word that they spoke with a view to interpret them as either cold and evil or hiding something sinister.That's what you see and that's your interpretation.You have decided they killed and buried their child.That's the end of it as far as you and others who go for the short cut want to see. The words of the Police saying that they are NOT suspects are something you are unable to accept. But they were spoken. The dogs alerts are NOT evidence, and even as indicators, need a lot more in terms of corroborating evidence to say the child is dead or that the parents had anything to do with harming her. But you say the opposite as your theory says the opposite.It's narrow at best. Biased as normal. prejudiced as always. The McCanns are only seen by us in TV interviews and in photographs. None of us know them personally and none of us are qualified to assess their personalities and private life until we do know them personally. What do the McCanns say that they are ? Innocent ? Is that all ? Or have you imagined them saying something else that they are and interpreted that as well ?
Z
Björn7 May 2019 at 16:40
Delete''They sabotaged the investigation about their own guilt or innocence by promoting "the search-for-Madeleine-alive-hidden- somewhere-by-a-paedophile story, and there we still are today.''
So the McCanns wishful thinking ( as opposed to the more realistic notion that she probably isn't alive now) is perceived by you as criminal genius.It fooled the PJ's finest, the met and OG.They promoted an idea of what they think ( or hope) was Madeleine's fate.But you think they invented the really simple theory and it fooled all of them. They're either the most ingenious criminals in history if they've pulled that off, or the joint brains of Portugal and the UK are beyond incompetent. Or you could just be way off the mark because yo're letting your bias cloud every thought you have and it's all coming out strange.
Z
There is nothing imagined about the McCanns odd behaviour Z. It was their odd behaviour that brought thousands onto social media to discuss wtf was going on - long before anyone even knew Goncalo Amaral's name btw. The McCanns and the British media were spinning one line only, abduction, but the Portuguese newspapers were telling a different story. Unfortunately for the McCanns, borders are meaningless on the internet. The PJ files and GA's book have always been accessible to the British public, despite all the millions the parents paid lawyers to prevent it.
DeleteYou forget it is the parents who have been the driving force behind all the publicity, it was they who invited the media in, it was they who paid £500k to stay on the front pages of the tabloids. They want to be talked about, but they have no control over how they are talked about. I can see why that would irk.
Those who want to know the truth, myself included WILL scrutinise the parents' behaviour, if only to reassure ourselves we have made the right call. I know for myself, I often revisit conclusions I have reached, and re-examined the scenario, what was going on at the time, and even my own feelings. My musings are a peep into the workings of my mind. I talk about my doubts, my fears and the way in which I interpret information. I am not comfortable in my belief that the McCanns are lying, I doubt anyone is, that's why we look for signs to support our beliefs. You could call it confirmation bias or you could call it proof, as in 'I think they are lying here because......', and that's what most people do, yourself included with your links.
The behaviour of the parents is central to all of the suspicions Z, that I'm afraid is the unpalatable truth. All those people who would once have been gossiping over the garden fence, are gossiping online, and those being gossiped about can read every word of it.
continues
You might be ok with being fed BS and spin Z, but others, myself included, find it offensive. The McCanns and their entourage (including you) are selling a story, a very profitable one, if you take into account Madeleine's Fund. You demand that we all accept their story without question on the basis that it is morally wrong to scrutinise the behaviour of those selling the story.
oops paras are a bit out of sync here :(
DeleteThe McCanns are selling the (2nd) Greatest Story Ever Told, the stealing of an angelic child and the wicked cop who blamed the parents. And it wasn't me who chucked in the religion, it was the pious pair and their photoshoots at the church (they have never been back to) and religious shrines.
This is a forum, people will say why they do not believe the parents, and put forward their reasons. Just as you are free to put forward your reasons for supporting the McCanns but never do. Unfortunately for you, the reasons for not believing the parents are multiple, reasons to believe boils down to one. 'There's no evidence'. Actually, there is lots of evidence, that's why it's still being discussed 12 years later.
Anonymous7 May 2019 at 20:40
ReplyDeleteWas she referring to fleeing the media circus or running away from the police. I don't think she'd write it in her book if she meant the latter.Do you ? How desperate are you trying that one lol
Media circus at that stage they were well under controll , you had to play the game , or you would be kept out of the loop , thats why nobody was staking out the rented villa or they never had to run a gauntlet everymorning leaving the said villa
so they were fleeing the police attention , anyone else in that situation would have done everything the police had asked , in twelve long years they have never been ruled out ...d
and they managed to flee PDL right under the nose of the PJ. are you suggesting that the PJ are that incompetent ? No wonder they had to call in the UK. It doesn't help unravel a mystery by writing a mystery story of your own and hoping people will slot that in. Keep it real
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HJob7LvpdRo
Delete1:59
Gerry McCann: "Our departure was cleared with the authorities. We had told the PJ we were going to leave on that weekend and, after our interviews, our lawyer absolutely clarified, were we allowed to go? There were no bail conditions, and the next day we, through the British Consul, we asked if we could leave and the senior investigators were put to the question 'Do you have any objections?' and the answer was: 'No'."
So, 12:56 they left the country legally, but their morality was in tatters?
DeleteHello
Deleteanon 7 May 2019 at 21:07
The Portuguese authorities allowed them to leave the country, so they took the chance as soon as they could, fearing that the PJ would question them again on Portuguese soil, which would have been difficult for them.
Instead, we got those rogatory letters, sent between the Leicestershire police and the PJ. It surely would’ve been much harder for them to be interrogated in Portugal at that time than in the UK, but that never happened.
So, just as you imply, the McCanns fled from the Portuguese justice, but not from media, because they needed media, as soon as they’d got home, to promote their abduction hypothesis and their innocence.
i believe the initial insinuation was that they fled the country to get away from the police, nor the press. I'm afraid you have to accept that it's been proven wrong now.
DeleteOf course they fled the country after they had been made aguidos, whilst they still could. Wouldn't you? Given the situation.
DeleteBut trying to hide it? Spin it now? a non-starter.
They were pratically met off the plane by Michael Caplan, the very powerful extradition lawyer famous for preventing General Pinochet's extradition to face torture charges. God knows what he charged per hour! They weren't mucking about. They did not ask 'permission' to go like children excusing themselves from class. They did not come home for the 'good of the children' as their fatuous PR had it. They got the hell out of there on legal advise whilst the going was still good. After that, only extradition to face actual formal charges (not just further questioning) could have forced them back to Portugal, nothing else.
Anonymous11 May 2019 at 00:41
Delete''Of course they fled the country after they had been made aguidos, whilst they still could. Wouldn't you? Given the situation. ''
It was after they had been arguidos, hence they were given permission to go home. So they left the country.There are sources and quotes that support this.You provide none to support your speculation.But you wan't to suggest something.That's not how credibility works.Or truth.
''But trying to hide it? Spin it now? a non-starter.''
They didn't though, did they.The spinning is being done trying to convince readers that they 'fled' as in went on the run -ergo guilty of something.But they just went home, with passports in their wallets, not in the police station filing cabinet.
''They were pratically met off the plane by Michael Caplan, the very powerful extradition lawyer famous for preventing General Pinochet's extradition to face torture charges''
Where they met by him or not met by him ? How do you 'practically' meet someone ? But, good idea, juxtaposing two 'fleeing arguidos' with Pinochet and torture.Not desperate either.
''They did not ask 'permission' to go like children excusing themselves from class. They did not come home for the 'good of the children' as their fatuous PR had it.''
Source ?
'' They got the hell out of there on legal advise whilst the going was still good. After that, only extradition to face actual formal charges (not just further questioning) could have forced them back to Portugal, nothing else.''
If the police still had them down as suspects they'd have had them surrender their passports.And their legal adviser wouldn't advise them to go on the run.That's silly.There must be a reason they haven't been 'forced' to return to Portugal.I know it's only 12 years in, but maybe the police haven't got, or are yet to find, a solid enough reason to force them back.They could always lift up a telephone and call the met, they're the other half of the investigative team and they don't have to extradite anyone.
Björn9 May 2019 at 15:13
Delete''Hello
anon 7 May 2019 at 21:07....So, just as you imply, the McCanns fled from the Portuguese justice, but not from media, because they needed media, as soon as they’d got home,''
You and 21: 07...
Are talking about what each other implies rather than any facts.That's a mixture of making things up from imagination, guessing and lying.That's not how to build a case to make anyone take seriously.For the record, both forces have made public announcements that the McCanns don't need to be 'cleared' of anything.They've never been charged with anything.They are '' not suspects -period'' ( PJ and SY).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteHi to whom it may concern
ReplyDeleteWe never got a 12th anniversary interview, so sad, but this will do.
Fiona Bruce interviewing the McCanns on 10th anniversary and my attempt to understand it.
Gerry says
“I think the situation is, that we've tried everything in our apparent not to have a long retracted missing person case like this.. devastating…. I really want to throw myself into trying to do everything we could to help find her..it hasn’t worked out yet..you know.. but we are still looking forward”
Sequence from 046 to 1.04
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jNTPYfFpLkg
Since I brought up the subject of embedded confessions, I’ve a few questions with regards to that. What’s this about? We know that Gerry in the evening of Madeleine’s disappearance talked about her as “a girl” that had gone missing, not Madeleine, not even his girl.
As the quote above shows, Madeleine 10 years later becomes even more degraded as he talks about her and the whole tragedy as “a missing person case”, as if he were talking about missing people in general, but not really about Madeleine.
Would anyone, whose wife, husband or child have gone missing, in whatever situation, tell a neighbour, journalist, a close friend or anybody, that he’s got himself “a missing person case” or that, the police authorities have got that.
Linguistically and emotionally Gerry couldn’t possibly have distanced himself further away from his daughter without emotionally breaking up with her, which I actually believe was about to happen 2 years ago.
Moreover,
“I really want to throw myself into trying to do everything we could…”???
Has he done so or does he only wish that he’d done so?
“It hasn’t worked out yet”
Is that because he hasn’t tried?
I’ve always thought that Kate was the most unarticulated and ambiguous of the two, but Gerry without a manuscript is no better.
Please, I’d like some help from my English friends.
“RETRACTED” missing person case. What does he mean? Does he believe that the case at some point of time was retracted?????
Björn8 May 2019 at 16:12
Delete''Since I brought up the subject of embedded confessions, I’ve a few questions with regards to that. What’s this about? We know that Gerry in the evening of Madeleine’s disappearance talked about her as “a girl” that had gone missing, not Madeleine, not even his girl. ''
I think what you're trying for there, if all those crime documentaries are to be used to solve this case, is 'detachment'. He is detaching himself , therefore, emotionally distancing himself from his child by making the reference to her non- personal.Here's a radical idea. When you see a text, just read the content-don't imagine a 'sub text' full of hidden horrors. Do the same when you hear words, listen to what they say, don't rush past them and imagine something 'subliminal' or 'embedded'. Petery Hyatt opened the bottle and that genie' has run riot ever since. He teaches guitar and holds Bible classes.Enough said.
''As the quote above shows, Madeleine 10 years later becomes even more degraded as he talks about her and the whole tragedy as “a missing person case”, as if he were talking about missing people in general, but not really about Madeleine. ''
Madeleine is 16 now and still missing. The police are calling it a missing person case.You rely heavily on 'as if' and 'what if' and try to sell the snake oil as a cure .
Why wouldn't you or anyone tell anyone that your child is a missing person case if that's what she is, that's what people read in the papers and see in the news ?
The tiny section of speech you've tried to use to incriminate Gerry McCann behind the lie of psychoanalyzing it, is about what the official state of the case is and trying to 'go forward' with optimism or hope.If you want to call something a lie, check it's a lie.If you want to tell everyone else it's a lie, explain why it is.Don't try to use some mad psychobabble you learned from youtube.
The case can't be 'retracted'. It can be shelved, solved or closed. What Gerry actually said was : '' we tried everything we could so we wouldn't have a long 'protracted' missing person case'. Protracted : drawn out.
Z
Bjorn, I think he meant the case had been dropped. They said, we thought it was you, but we take that back.
DeleteHello
DeleteOscar 8 May 2019 at 20:59
&
Ziggy May 2019 at 18:33
Thanks for comments and feedback. You should know that it isn't always so easy for a non-native speaker of English like me to grasp everything that the McCanns are saying. Gerry with his Scottish accent and Kate in particular with her evasive style of talking and her attempt to sound more upper class than she actually is, makes it difficult, though their falsity beyond the spoken words can often be read so clearly.
Bjorn, Gerry speaks a particularly impenetrable dialect of Scots, which is known as "Schemie", don't beat yourself up.
DeleteI see what you mean about the translation difficulties. In England, and Liverpool in particular,the general opinion of Kate's dialect is that she sounds really common for a middle class doctor and hasn't dropped her obvious working class roots. Some would say that's showing pride in them, others would say it shows she isn't pretentious or fake just because of her career.But if you want to try and invent a profile that shows her as dishonest, fake and so forth in order to later use that as 'evidence' of her being like that in all areas of her life- including abusing, killing or burying kids, then every little helps I suppose.
DeleteHello Anonymous9 May 2019 at 14:57
Delete"But if you want to try and invent a profile that shows her as dishonest, fake and so forth.."
No, my remarks about Kate's and Gerry's language was just to point out that I sometimes have difficulties in understanding what they say and mean, and therefore I may jump to the conclusion and be wrong. That's all.
Hello Oscar 9 May 2019 at 11:24
DeleteThanks for helping me sort out my linguistic problems. I feel much better now.
When I as teenager decided to spend a few weeks in England in the sixties, I'd prepared a speech in English, in which I intended to explain to the Immingham customs officers what my mission in the UK was and how important it was.
The officer, that I met on my arrival got very irritated, when I took up my manuscript and was about to read from it. I didn’t quite understand what he was saying, as I hadn't heard the dialect before. Anyway, he made me understand that he wasn't particularly interested in my “adventurous” plans, but more or less pushed me into his country.
Nowhere was the English language spoken as I'd tried to learn it. I really thought, that I'd come to a strange place, but it was just reality.
Bjorn 9 May 2019 at 21:55
DeleteThat is a common problem. For the English, school French (which most of us learn) is no preparation for actual France where the schoolchild can't understand a word that is spoken as it's way too fast and casual. It's like having to learn the language over again from a place of loss of confidence. Schoolroom learning is like blocking rather than learning a language.
The perils of accent are many. My son spent much time learning everyday French in conversation with his French friend and family, rather grand now - heart surgeon, super rich of Monaco etc, but they had very humble peasant origins. My son gained fluency rather painlessly, but gets gently mocked in snobby Paris for his quaint 'yokel' accent that he's completely unaware of, can't hear himself, and doesn't give a toss about. Accent snobbery doesn't travel.
That Kate and Gerry do not hide their working class origins is rather refreshing. Though only the British are aware of it from the way they talk. It's a bit unexpected as class snobbery is alive and well here. It obviously cuts against the 'privileged' and 'protected' couple rubbish. Pity they are less transparent and less natural-sounding in other ways.
All visual media is show business now bjorn.There's an unhealthy obsession for reactions and drama. Everyone wants to be seen reacting to something as though they're a dying swan. It's like they can smell a TV camera and have their moves ready.Everybody wants to perform.Ironically, all the fakery was inspired by reality TV
DeleteZ
Anonymous 10 May 2019 at 12:54
DeleteExcellent post. Thank you.
“Pity they are less transparent and less natural-sounding in other ways.”
T
Björn9 May 2019 at 21:09
Delete''I sometimes have difficulties in understanding what they say and mean, and therefore I may jump to the conclusion and be wrong. That's all.''
You say 'that's all' as though it's nothing. But it leads you to make some damning accusations and draw some wild conclusions and after that your maths suffers because of your English.You make 2 + 2 = 12
Hi Anon10 May 2019 at 14:02
DeleteAs for mathematics, Gerry in his 10th anniversary interview said that they should've been " a family of five (5) all these years, but completely forgot that they were and still are ,if Madeleine would still be alive,which they've always claimed.
Remember; There is nothing to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm" as Gerry has said. Yet, Gerry in that interview talks as though they were a family of 5 minus 1, which they can only be if Madeleine is dead or if the McCanns have for some reason distanced themselves emotionally from their daughter, which could be the case, as I've suggested in one of my earlier posts.
Anon 10 May 2019 at 12:54
DeleteHi Interesting post, Thanks.
I think it was the philosopher and linguist Jaques Derrida who said. "I only speak one language and that's my own"
Have nice weekend.
Hi Björn 10 May 2019 at 18:49
Deletein reply to me 10 May 2019 at 12:54
Derrida also said:
"The infinite alterity of the divine substance does not interpose itself as an element of mediation or opacity in the transparence of self-relationship and the purity of auto-affection."
But we should try not to hold that too much against him.
Have a nice weekend too.
Björn10 May 2019 at 18:37
Delete''Hi Anon10 May 2019 at 14:02
As for mathematics, Gerry in his 10th anniversary interview said that they should've been " a family of five (5) all these years, but completely forgot that they were and still are ,if Madeleine would still be alive,which they've always claimed.''
Seriously ? Actually, both Kate and Gerry have said that in interviews. If we take it in context, rather than edit it to incriminate somebody, the conversation was talking about how they'd lived and carried on in the last 10 years without Madeleine.They said they'd lived as a family of four when it should have been five( Madeleine as well).
''Remember; There is nothing to suggest that Madeleine has come to any harm" as Gerry has said. Yet, Gerry in that interview talks as though they were a family of 5 minus 1, which they can only be if Madeleine is dead''
See, you're still doing it. It wasn't a general knowledge test or an interrogation by a forensic or criminal psychologist. It was just an interview for television.They had lived as four instead of five as one was missing.So it was a functioning family of four ( five minus one).You see that as yet another reason to pronounce Madeleine dead.You're still trying to imply that they are making an 'embedded confession'
''the McCanns have for some reason distanced themselves emotionally from their daughter, which could be the case, as I've suggested in one of my earlier posts.''
And 2+2 is still = 12 for you.
Z
Anonymous10 May 2019 at 12:54
Deletebjorn
''. Pity they are less transparent and less natural-sounding in other ways. ''
Without inventing your off-the-wall interpretations of speech and blinking, can you give a few examples of how the McCanns have been less natural sounding and transparent as I, many others, and several detectives ( who also have access to youtube as you do) have missed.Remember, no wacky opinions that can't be supported by logic or evidence. Your last couple of 'theories' have been a bit disturbing.
In all of the discussions on here, I am glad to reflect there has never been any dispute as to the role of the MSM in the UK.
ReplyDeleteIt is accepted by us all that there was no consistent pattern of stories from around 4th May, all concentrating on a)rubbishing Portuguese justice b) saying the Portuguese people were happy to facilitate child abuse c) highlighting the ongoing persecution of the parents d) creating false leads e) keeping the abduction story to the fore f) tarnishing Amaral's reputation.
Sadly I don't anticipate us discussing The McCann's War, at all.
Ziggy, congrats on one of the all time great games last night. I had actually hoped it was Ajax that were going to benefit from Barcelona's aging squad. You lot for there first though.
Fucking brilliant, as Klop might say - after 10 pm of course.
lol nice one Oscar..it was up there with our best of 'European nights' :) I just watched another epic and Spurs did it. Bring it on. June the 1st can't come soon enough. That stadium holds just under 70,000. Each team is only getting 17,000 tickets each.Disgusting. But they are seriously underrating the mad scousers in Europe. We'll sneak at least 30, 000 in their disguised as business men with their kits on under the pinstripes :)
DeleteZ
He means protracted.
ReplyDeleteHello Rufus 8 May 2019 22:21
Delete"He means protracted"
Thanks a lot Rufus. Ziggy, as well, told me so.
Listening to Gerry in that clip I couldn't hear and I couldn't have figured it out, as I wasn't even familiar with this word.
You may perhaps know that the English language is a far richer language in terms of vocabulary compared to my Swedish language.
The Glasgow accent is difficult for a lot of people, bjorn.GM has a softer one, probably due to his career in England and the need to be understood, but it's still quite dificult.I'm English but my ex wife is Glaswegian. She always had a 'plan B' if she wasn't making herself clear to me.It was usually a household object hurtling toward my head at great speed.I soon learned the little nuances of her dialect after a few mis-timed ducks.
DeleteHello Anon9 May 2019 at 20:25
DeleteInteresting, I've had a similar experience, as my wife speaks an old fashioned regional dialect, while mine is more of standard Swedish, though Swedes in Stockholm may not agree. She still gets so annoyed when I don't understand what she's saying, accusing me for not listening, when, in fact, that's the only thing that I've been doing for almost half a century.
Have a nice weekend
try sign language with each other ;-)
DeleteBjörn 10 May 2019 at 12:36
DeleteNice one, Björn.
T
Björn us weegies (Glaswegians) can be a little hard to understand, even for those for whom English is a first language.
DeleteI was thinking of the recent developments that OG / UK / PJ all pretended were happening just prior to them holding out the cap for money again.I know i said they'd lead nowhere based on them all leading nowhere because they don't actually appear to be true.None of them. But it was a couple of other things that caught my attention.
ReplyDeleteThe netflix documentary was timed to run, then conclude, just before the annual liefest and money injection.So attention would be alert when the anniversary occurred.Once that happened, the media were fed more detailed 'information' about leads / suspects as it was accepted that they weren't half asleep.So we were given a name, a prison a history.Then they were given their cash.Then they could say it was all crap once the cheques had cleared.
At the same time, Australia brought some podcasts to the table.Not too shoddy ones either.I believe it's topped some kind of 'hit parade' ( tasteful boast I have to say considering the subject matter).The most discussed of these concerned the offer of a free( no cash, OG, you won't have to lose any of that) analysis of the DNA. The biggest and most chewed bone of contention in the 12 years of hysterical debate online.And of course a thorn in the side ( or crown) of Amaral-the-unready.
The antis have tried to suggest that the dogs findings / indicators are real evidence( which they clearly can't be).I have said they would have been used by now if they held any truth.I'm told, by way of a rebuttal, that they're probably awaiting advances in DNA analysis.I know i mocked that as desperate. But I wasn't aware that those advances existed and have done for years.The leader in the field Dr Mark Perlin.He has an impressive record of success.And he offered his services for free.So, given the timing it looks quite embarrassing for the investigation to have their game exposed by everyone regarding their tricks to get funding as they also refuse or ignore the free offer that could do what they have failed to do in twelve years.The good Dr has said he could deliver answers in within a week.
So, as some kind of half-cocked response in the media we hear about OG using DNA-17 testing on the old evidence.Sounds nice and science fiction-y doesn't it.Sounds 'techy'.I think it was to counter the accusations of them hiding from the Dr.It didn't work. He exposed it as an archaic technique that's years behind his own.
So, what now.Did they really test it ? I suppose we have to believe them.We have to believe they still have it.I'd like to see it myself.Or at least know why they won't let Dr Perlin see it.All the questions could be answered,The indicators from the clothes, the apartment and the car.It could completely exonerate the parents.It could completely incriminate somebody else.It would be the final stone of the no stones unturned promise.
Z
Hi Z the same DNA evidence could also implicate the parents. There is a great book by Mike Silverman - Written In Blood. He is a forensic scientist who worked for Met,Kent police & The Home Office. He explains the history & progress of using DNA in solving crimes.
DeleteHi Ziggy 9 May 2019 at 20:55
Delete"The indicators from the clothes, the apartment and the car.It could completely exonerate the parents.It could completely incriminate somebody else.It would be the final stone of the no stones unturned promise"
You forgot to say, that such a new forensic analysis could just as well incriminate the McCanns. Remember 15 markers out of 19 matched Madeleine's DNA profile, not anybody else's.
Z 9 May 2019 at 20:55
DeleteThank you, Comrade
“So, what now.Did they really test it ? I suppose we have to believe them.We have to believe they still have it.I'd like to see it myself.Or at least know why they won't let Dr Perlin see it.All the questions could be answered,The indicators from the clothes, the apartment and the car.It could completely exonerate the parents.It could completely incriminate somebody else.It would be the final stone of the no stones unturned promise.”
Clothes were not tested for DNA AFAIR.
I don’t see how a reinterpretation of the results of the DNA tests of the samples from the apartment and the car could, by itself, completely exonerate or incriminate anyone. I seem to remember your post in which you argued, correctly in my view, to that effect.
To be fair, the parents are innocent until proven guilty. They need no exoneration, it would seem. The said reinterpretation would not prove their guilt in an English court, I shouldn’t think.
Respect.
T
Hi John 100 / Bjorn
DeleteWhen i said what i said I hoped it would imply that the parents could also be incriminated. I basically suggest that if the DNA or Blood or whatever else is subjected to a far deeper analysis, it could basically close the door on a lot of speculation.It could incriminate a name we are all familiar with or one none of us have heard.But the main point i was trying to make is that the worse case scenario would leave us back to where we are now- in the air.The best case scenario would be that names could be eliminated or arrested.It could be that 'corroborating evidence' that's been required.We could end up with the case being solved and all speculation ended.I wonder why the offer hasn't been accepted.
Z
Z 10 May 2019 at 13:53
Delete"I wonder why the offer hasn't been accepted."
You know why. You may not be able/seem not to want to acknowledge that. That is your choice, but there is no mystery here. Do you have a pet theory that is challenged or fed by your opinion?
Also, DNA testing was inconclusive about whether it was Madeleine's DNA, not a suspect's. No finger pointing would come from it. Determining it was hers for certain still would not show how it got there. There was already the very strong possibility established it was hers, but not strong enough to be proof. And then, proof of what? It would increase not close the door on speculation. This is not an investigation being carried out in the public gaze. Do you think it should be? How would that help justice for the McCanns or Madeleine?
Anonymous10 May 2019 at 13:40
DeleteBrother T
I've read /heard so much about the presence of blood /dna/cadaverine being on sheets, clothes, toys, car boots and whatever I can barely keep up. Obviously the majority of such reliable reports come from a specific group who have no qualifications but deem themselves qualified to nail the case and the culprits. I know a lot of it will be wishful thinking and some will be merely misunderstandings.But a scientist could do the job on whatever is available to be tested.
''I don’t see how a reinterpretation of the results of the DNA tests of the samples from the apartment and the car could, by itself, completely exonerate or incriminate anyone''
There's a chance it could and a chance it couldn't.There's a chance it might only confirm what we already have on record and nothing will happen. But, the way I see it, when you're desperate to find clues or breaks and somebody offers to help, you take it.They dig holes in PDL hunch ( apparently). What's wrong with passing a few test tubes to a doctor ? I can envisage, at best, a case for the prosecution could be built on circumstantial evidence.Not now- or it would have.There's nothing to use.A charge would be difficult to agree on let alone prove.Murder / homicide is off the table without a body.If malice aforethought can't be proven, or pre- meditation, it's not an option. Manslaughter at best, due to an accident.But all of this would depend on evidence suggesting a death. The Dr can't test for cadaverine.But if the DNA tells more than the initial test then the debate about the car boot moves up a notch.But it would depend on it belonging to Madeleine and the parents.If it doesn't, the car won't be that important any more.It would also confirm or dispel the accusation of the evidence having been tampered with ( Amaral said that).
''To be fair, the parents are innocent until proven guilty. They need no exoneration, it would seem. The said reinterpretation would not prove their guilt in an English court, I shouldn’t think.''
I agree. As you have probably seen over the last year, I often say as much.That's why i get ambushed and accused of being a pro. Just for stating the law.It's the law and it's their right. It isn't for them to prove their innocence, it's for the police and the prosecution to prove their guilt.Which is why they'll probably have the supreme court ruling overruled in relation to the spirit of the law.When i say exonerated in this context, i mean in the court of public opinion, which seems to think it is all knowing and above needing evidence to prove it.
Z
Z Anonymous9 May 2019 at 20:55
Delete"So, as some kind of half-cocked response in the media we hear about OG using DNA-17 testing on the old evidence. Sounds nice and science fiction-y doesn't it. Sounds 'techy'. I think it was to counter the accusations of them hiding from the Dr. It didn't work. He exposed it as an archaic technique that's years behind his own."
Don't mean to be rude, but this is pretty kooky thinking. The Met are a serious police force, OG are funded direct from the HO. Are you saying they would play games with some random Australian podcast in the MSM? Whatever are you getting at here? Why would they do this?
And, of new DNA testing: "It could completely exonerate the parents. It could completely incriminate somebody else. It would be the final stone of the no stones unturned promise." But you don't know that it would be a 'final stone' do you? It can't incriminate anyone else as it was only about the child's DNA, no one elses. Can't exonerate the parents, can't incriminate them either. Is it Madeleine's DNA or not? the only question on the table.
"Dogs findings / indicators are - not - real evidence" The dogs are indicators, they indicated. They did their job. That is the beginning and end of it. Your use of them as not being 'real evidence' implies you may not understand their role.
"The Netflix documentary was timed to run, then conclude, just before the annual liefest and money injection." Very sorry to point it out again, but there you go again with some very wild reasoning. Netflix is an American media provider, in what way does OG have any influence with this company? Seems very, very silly to even ask. I am not sure you are thinking this through. It is easy to see 'coordination' where there is coincidence, if you don't think about it too much.
You carry on: "Once that happened, the media were fed more detailed 'information' about leads / suspects as it was accepted that they weren't half asleep. So we were given a name, a prison a history. Then they were given their cash. Then they could say it was all crap once the cheques had cleared".
I really don't wanna insult you, but that does sound very close to some weird conspiracy theory thing. It implies some man stroking a white cat in a high-tech cave somewhere. I'm sure you don't mean that, btw. Only, what could you mean otherwise? You come over as angry as hell, could this be colouring your judgement? Just a thought. I suggest something is, as your reasoning seems a bit over the top, to say the least.
BTW why would 'someone' go to all that trouble to get funding from HO? Seems a little over-complex, doesn't it? If 'someone' has this much power and control, and you imply a very great deal of both, then why would they not just get a bit of money direct and secretly? Without a very public (and transatlantic) charade, with many, many people needing to be 'in the know' about the scam. And why would they all comply?
You are entitled to your hunches and opinions, but this is all pretty ungrounded. Just what you want to think really. Though conspiracy theories can be entertaining, it feels a bit way off and disrespectful territory here, because a real little kid on holiday was really lost. Maybe, in just joining some dots up, you are not thinking through the wider implications of what you are writing and how this comes across?
Ciao
Anonymous10 May 2019 at 17:44
Delete''You know why. You may not be able/seem not to want to acknowledge that''
If I knew why, I wouldn't state that I wondered why it hasn't.The last I read about it was that OG hadn't replied to the offer.Hence my wondering . If they have replied since last week then I need to catch up.
''Do you have a pet theory that is challenged or fed by your opinion?''
Yes, the Dr did it.
What we know about the original analysis is that it was / is inconclusive. Taken as a 'package' the PJ /OG/SY have to consider that the blood and DNA need corroborating.They have already confirmed that the dogs' indicators are NOT evidence- only indicators. As I've sated before , several times, I personally think that the dogs' so called 'findings' would have been made use of well before now if they had any use at all.I believe they're all but dismissed.But, a few determined to keep the McCanns in the spotlight of suspicion cling to them as evidence-despite the FSS saying otherwise- and that they have never been officially declared as discarded as evidence by the police so they must be waiting for advances in analysis.I mocked the desperation and denial involved in this reasoning. But, since reading the credentials and record of the good doctor, and that he offered help for free, I decided that maybe the advances have already existed but I was unaware of it.hence me suggesting it would be a good idea to try. What is to lose ? At worst we are where we are. I'm sure the Dr knows more than I do about the area. he might even know more than you seem to as well.But he still, despite the futility you point out, thinks he could help the investigation.
'' This is not an investigation being carried out in the public gaze. Do you think it should be? How would that help justice for the McCanns or Madeleine?''
Wherever it's being carried out, it's the public is who has their money taken to fund it.As such, they have a right to question how it's being spent.Nobody expects a running commentary. But we are entitled to question why good money is thrown after bad twice a year.Feeding us fictional leads and suspects doesn't wash when it's time to ask for cash. Justice for the McCanns doesn't depend on how public or private the investigation is, but how successful , honest, and efficient.
Z
The hope is, Ziggy, that with DNA evidence somebody may crack and own up to the false abduction strategy. Remember Gilroy was jailed for a murder without a body, albeit with much more detailed circumstantial evidence.
Delete“You forgot to say, that such a new forensic analysis could just as well incriminate the McCanns.”
DeleteNo, it could not.
“Remember 15 markers out of 19 matched Madeleine's DNA profile, not anybody else's.”
You, and many others, either haven’t read or haven’t understood John Lowe’s report, Björn. He is a specialist in LCN DNA testing, his report is in the files. You had a link from me in the past. You don’t have to take his report as gospel, you can check it yourself.
Have a good weekend.
T
That report is a ed rag to the anti bulls, T ;-)
DeleteOscar Slater10 May 2019 at 21:02
DeleteThat's what i meant, Oscar. With so little on the table their hasn't even been enough to build a prosecution against anyone for anything even as a circumstantial case.Hence what I said on the previous thread about the best clean up since Winston Wolf.It's as though everything's disappeared.So every little helps...;-)
Anonymous10 May 2019 at 19:57
DeleteI thought what I said was pretty clear.There's been a collision of more than a couple of things.The final episode of the Netflix documentary, the anniversary itself, the requests from both forces for money, the announcement of 'more than one suspect'( PJ), the 'new lead' ( from years ago, making it an old one really) who was named and the offer of deeper analysis of DNA from the top man in the field.I suggested the public's alertness would be to the fore this year because of that collision and news saturation. It's becoming clearer that the public aren't buying the new leads and one last lead narratives now.The refusal to even acknowledge the offer of the DNA analysis looks bad because it is bad. It doesn't engender public faith or trust.The met have always used the 'we don't have to provide a running commentary' as the stock cover.That's true, they don't.But they must have known the public feeling was turning against them.So suddenly they provide part of a running commentary and tell us about the DNA tests they've been secretly carrying out.Coincidence ?It isn't kooky thinking as you call it. The met aren't the slick professional outfit you see in the movies.Far from it.
The are plenty of questions on the table.The court of public opinion insist there's evidence all over that table.
''not being 'real evidence' implies you may not understand their role.''
No, I pointed out that they are not used in an evidential role but merely as indicators.That their indicators highlight isolated areas that could yield actual evidence.
''..in what way does OG have any influence with this company?''
I'm sorry to point out to you, that i never suggested a connection or influence between Netflix and OG.I suggested the timing with the public's attention in mind.
''I really don't wanna insult you, but that does sound very close to some weird conspiracy theory thing''
It's OK. You don't insult me with remarks like that, you insult those who swallow official stories without questioning.What actual 'conspiracy' is it referring to would you say ?I made some very cold facts. The documentary concluded.The requests for cash coincided.The online reactions had grown cynical and mistrusting of the actual money being spent well.The offer of a deeper analysis of the DNA. They happened. No conspiracy.
'' You come over as angry as hell, could this be colouring your judgement?''
You read it incorrectly.Maybe the exposing of the official BS annoys you and it colours how you interpret things.
''Seems a little over-complex, doesn't it? ''
No it doesn't. You submit a request and receive the money.But the requests are the one thing that people can cite as evidence that they really are investigating it.
''You are entitled to your hunches and opinions, but this is all pretty ungrounded. Just what you want to think really.''
I didn't say i wanted to think it.What i want to think is that the police are hard working and honest and so are the politicians.But i don't. I'd be stupid to.
''Though conspiracy theories can be entertaining, it feels a bit way off and disrespectful territory here, because a real little kid on holiday was really lost.''
You're bending over backwards to try to be patronising. Was i supposed to miss that ? I get it, you're evolved and aware etc and all conspiracy theories are for the tin foil hat brigade etc. I'm aware of who went missing.I'm aware that Amaral points to a PM and MI5 colluding to cover it up as well as the burying of her corpse.Is he a conspiracy nut too ? I can reel off many 'entertaining' conspiracy theories if you like.They contain names of politicians too. And how the police and other politicians closed rank to protect the truth from an investigation
ciao
Butting in on Z10 May 2019 at 20:49
DeleteIt's that "I personally think". That gives the game away, Buddy. But go get 'em with your insight pulled from thin air.
"If I knew why, I wouldn't state that I wondered why it hasn't." Maybe get informed rather than spouting ignorant, disgruntled crap? Or just jeep 'wondering', then spout forth anyway.
"The last I read about it was that OG hadn't replied to the offer". Well, why the heck aren't the Metropolitan police and the police force of Portugal keeping some old dude on the internet informed, for some reason? The nerve. You'd think they would have the common decency to phone you, wouldn't you?
"If they have replied since last week then I need to catch up.' They sure need to call a meeting at the highest level to keep you in the loop, unforgiveable oversight. You are the nerve centre after all.
"They have already confirmed that the dogs' indicators are NOT evidence- only indicators". That doesn't need confirming to anyone - only maybe you? Do you EVER admit you're wrong about ANYTHING?
"As I've stated before, several times, I personally think that the dogs' so called 'findings' would have been made use of well before now if they had any use at all." SEVERAL TIMES, huh? Everybody is just so hanging on what you "personally think". Needing to repeat your golden opinion? of all things. The dunces and ingrates. "So called findings" you're a blast. Back to not understanding the dogs, and so it goes around…
"I mocked the desperation and denial involved in this reasoning." What the hell would we do without you? We can only sit at your feet and marvel.
"I decided that maybe the advances have already existed but I was unaware of it". My God, the penny drops, maybe you know nothing beyond gassing as you prop up a bar? Light dawns that just possibly thinking and saying you know everything isn’t quite the same as knowing everything, or anything at all. It occurs to you that maybe you need to go away and find something out? But heck, how could it be you'd been left uniformed and "unaware of it?" Just make it up then.
"hence me suggesting it would be a good idea to try." The massive resources and combined expertise of two police forces in two countries couldn't be more grateful for your suggestion. What would they do without you?
"But we are entitled to question why good money is thrown after bad twice a year.' You, Buddy, have absolutely no way of knowing that is happening, you have no way of assessing the merits or payoffs of investment in this case. Do you? Go on admit it. And no, an active investigation doesn't have to seek you out and justify any expense or their working method.
"Justice for the McCanns doesn't depend on how public or private the investigation is, but how successful, honest, and efficient." You tell 'em, partner. Call that high level meeting they could sure do with your sage advice... Z for next Commissioner of the Met, with immediate effect. BTW where have you been? Didn’t you see what happened when this investigation was the subject of an intense media circus? So, ‘private’ kind of a given for justice here. But heck, the Met just don't have your wisdom or professional expertise, we forgot.
Ciao
Anonymous10 May 2019 at 19:57
Delete''BTW why would 'someone' go to all that trouble to get funding from HO? Seems a little over-complex, doesn't it? If 'someone' has this much power and control, and you imply a very great deal of both, then why would they not just get a bit of money direct and secretly?''
I'm not so sure about a 'someone'. This investigation has spanned the length of time it takes to have tow different parties in charge of the Britain and four different Prime Ministers.So, obviously, a few different people have been Home Secretary.I haven't implied a great deal about a 'someone' anywhere. I've implied that someone might ultimately be being protected, yes. But that not that they were able to or have facilitated the cover up necessary that would see no incriminating evidence left anywhere, no intelligence passed along and no eye witnesses.There exists a chain of command beneath those who occupy the higher echelons.To request money covertly runs a risk of later exposure. To request it openly enables the investigation to maintain the appearance of just another ( albeit very expensive) police investigation.
''Without a very public (and transatlantic) charade, with many, many people needing to be 'in the know' about the scam. And why would they all comply?''
Who comprises 'all' ? If the orders begin with MI 5 or 6 -who never involve themselves in police investigations- or the HO or PM - who never involve themselves in police investigations- then the 'all' doesn't include any of the detectives on the ground.Those detectives have superiors. That brings the number right down.Above them are the politicians.That keeps the number right down.The detectives and all other police personnel involved would not necessarily be aware of what's been decided in offices that don't concern them.They just follow the orders of where to look.Which have invariably been in empty spaces.
This could all be conspiracy nonsense of course. Maybe MI5 and 6 do involve themselves in police investigations.maybe PMs often try to barge in on investigations to organise 'help' and write cheques indefinitely.And maybe the Prime Ministers, Home Secretaries and Intel officers have all used the funding to keep it open, and the media to keep it billed as a mystery just to protect two British people because they are members of the middle classes with good jobs and a nice house.Who can, incidentally, also demand that every effort should be taken to make sure they remain innocent and that the police don't investigate them. Yes,that's far more likely than a 'kooky conspiracy theory I suppose.
Z
Oscar10 May 2019 at 21:02
DeleteSomeone did nearly crack over dogs/DNA back in 2007, didn't they? Remember Kate's notorious near acceptance of what she later spun as a 'bargain' before being made an arguida, a confession discussed with her lawyer through the night. He later had to very much make clear she had 'misunderstood', the 'bargain' issue, which did not exist, so as not to perjure himself. A confession would have put the child's status as 'dead', bear in mind. That night it was Gerry who decided to tough it out instead, and call the PJ's bluff, going from 'our lives are over', as he prostrated himself on the floor, to a rallying, 'they've got nothing'. You've really got to hand it to him... It's all in 'Madeleine', with obvious sugar coating, and slight of hand, but still there. Amazed that Kate published his words, or any of it, amazed the lawyers let her.
Confirmation of the DNA as Madeleine's wouldn't close the case though. It's just 'grandmother's footsteps'. The probability has always been there, but not 100% proof. Still leaves the question of how it got where it was, and, what crime, anyway? How? as Gerry has asked. It's a tough case. Despite the dogs/DNA being left inconclusive for 12 years, no one has come close to confession since, it seems. Just attempts to rubbish/hide that particular sword of Damocles. But someone somewhere is carrying one hell of a burden, waking up to one hell of a threat every single day. After all, someone knows what happened to Madeleine McCann.
Anonymous11 May 2019 at 13:37
Delete''Maybe get informed rather than spouting ignorant, disgruntled crap? Or just jeep 'wondering', then spout forth anyway.''
Before i begin tying to dissect your trademark silliness and anger, shallis, can I just remind you of when you pretended you were making a melodramatic exist from the blog. Ros had made it clear about how rudeness for the sake of it and trolling had become intolerable.Since then, while disagreements have remained, silliness and rudeness haven't.Now you're back posting, it's returned.Which sort of supports what i said last week. You were responsible.
''Why the heck aren't the Metropolitan police and the police force of Portugal keeping some old dude on the internet informed, for some reason? The nerve.''
The 'dude' thing again. Very convincing, stranger.My answer was /is relevant about the public's right to ask and the met's responsibility to keep that kind of decision public.
''unforgiveable oversight. You are the nerve centre after all.''
You and your academic skills. What chance does anyone have against it.
''SEVERAL TIMES, huh? Everybody is just so hanging on what you "personally think". Needing to repeat your golden opinion? of all things.''
Again, my reply was relevant to the post I was replying to.Why can't you control your need to try to discredit me and what i say ? It's like an illness.Is it because you finally gave up trying to dismantle my actual points so you need to get drunk and start a virtual fight ? Grow up.
'' What the hell would we do without you? We can only sit at your feet and marvel.''
Or get up and go make me a coffee. Milk one sugar.
'' My God, the penny drops, maybe you know nothing beyond gassing as you prop up a bar? Light dawns that just possibly thinking and saying you know everything ''
Not really. All i said was I had never studied or worked in the field of DNA analysis and I had no need to keep abreast of developments in that field.Your reaction proves that there is always a correlation between intelligence and a sense of humour.You score low on both.
''. What would they do without you?''
They could email the expert who made the offer in the first place.
''You, Buddy, have absolutely no way of knowing that is happening, you have no way of assessing the merits or payoffs of investment in this case''
I ,' buddy', said we're entitled to question how public money is spent by public servants.That's true.
''Go on admit it.''
See above.
'' You tell 'em, partner. Call that high level meeting they could sure do with your sage advice..''
I know.
'' Didn’t you see what happened when this investigation was the subject of an intense media circus?''
The case was, the investigation wasn't.
Z
Chow
PS Your post. What percentage would you say discussed the case and Madeleine and what percentage was intended as a personal insult directed toward another poster ?
Anonymous11 May 2019 at 14:34
Delete' Amazed that Kate published his words, or any of it, amazed the lawyers let her.'
You may be amazed because in your mind there's all kinds of clues that point o her guilt.But that's only in your head. Newsflash : The police can read books too.They read what you read.But they didn't have an agenda to interpret whatever they could subjectively.
''Still leaves the question of how it got where it was, and, what crime, anyway? How? ''
It got in the apartment because that's where Madeleine was. The apartment.
''Just attempts to rubbish/hide that particular sword of Damocles. But someone somewhere is carrying one hell of a burden, waking up to one hell of a threat every single day. ''
Who ? Are you trying to suggest it's KM ? There's nothing to suggest that. If you use the DNA anomaly as an argument, it's the FSS who are hiding a secret if anyone is in fact hiding one.They had the 'evidence' remember.
Concerning11 May 2019 at 15:54 but not a direct reply, for obvious reasons.
DeleteWhat is this? Is this guy unhinged? Is that even a reply? Does he hear voices? Why is he writing this weird stuff. It makes no sense at all.
That is pretty off the wall. I don't want to be responsible for anyone else's mental health breakdown. Jesus.
ciao (if I dare)
I doubt that anyone who just read your post understands what it mans or why you posted 21:18
DeleteZ 10 May 2019 at 18:45
ReplyDelete"Murder is off the table without a body."
Not true, is it? Look up many successful prosecutions, after body 'fed to pigs' or some horror. Wherever did you get that idea from?
''The parents are innocent until proven guilty". Then, "As you have probably seen over the last year, I often say as much. That's why i get ambushed and accused of being a pro. Just for stating the law".
Absolutely EVERYBODY says this. Stop claiming a false moral high ground, of one, a very conceited, one. Just what are you thinking about yourself? and other people? how DARE you suggest no one else cares about justice? You are delusional if you think ANYONE doesn't know and 100% support that. You write: "it isn't for them to prove their innocence, it's for the police and the prosecution to prove their guilt." Really? Why do you insult people by implying those who don't share your opinions about this case, and in fact now a whole EU country (Portugal), who 'don't agree with you', must therefore wish to ignore a glorious human right?
In the way you write, you seem to think yourself very important, like people are hanging off your every word. Why? BTW do you have any particular expertise or relevant professional skill that you haven't revealed here yet? You are just some dude spouting stuff, and you have a right to do that if you want - but don't forget the platform you are using isn't your right.
"Which is why they'll probably have the supreme court ruling overruled in relation to the spirit of the law". You don't understand the appeal to ECHR. Not the 'spirit' but hard fact here. They can't actually win. They are extremely unlikely to have case get to court as it will be dismissed. Application doesn't mean one hell of an awful lot, other than lawyers were willing to draft an application (for a fee). Expect they were told it's a very long shot as their top flight lawyers won't bullshit them. But they just do not have a case against Portugal (it's not about cop, Amaral).
Your expression the "court of public opinion" that you so bravely withstand all by yourself, this again shows you think you hold the high ground, of one. When did you get so hell puffed up? NO ONE "thinks it is all knowing and above needing evidence to prove it." EVERYONE is stating the law. Your horse is very high. It is hard not to be really affronted by your arrogance.
"the way I see it". Rather too much of that. Some humility?
“I can envisage, at best, a case for the prosecution could be built on circumstantial evidence”, there is a ton of that. It is not enough on its own. Prosecutions aren’t ‘bent’, they know proof beyond reasonable doubt is needed. The police need THAT. ‘Knowing’ and ‘proof’ aren‘t the same thing, they know that too, everyone does. Don't smear everyone with corruption.
"What's wrong with passing a few test tubes to a doctor?" Where do we begin? You are possibly not an expert in DNA and forensics? Obviously not. 'Test tubes"? It's data! And this shows you are right out your depth, if nothing else did. Which it also did. Sorry to be blunt, but best to leave alone areas you are really ignorant about, and haven't grasped the fundamentals, or you sound pretty silly, and you put your foot right in it.
You do come over as colossally arrogant about something you actually seem to know nearly zilch about. Sorry to be blunt again. But your misplaced self-adulation is pretty aggravating. Like you don't respect others. it's pretty weird. You just seem like some guy with a really, really high opinion of himself and a strangely inflated idea about his own importance here, and not much knowledge or understanding about the case.
I think posting here is maybe playing with your mind in negative ways. It is you who seems to think you are "all knowing".
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Delete
DeleteAnonymous11 May 2019 at 00:11
''"the way I see it". Rather too much of that. Some humility?''
Why does anyone need to show humility to express their opinion ? Would you rather they took a leaf from your book and made sweeping statements that have nothing at all to support them, insist that they're fact because your opinion's far too important to be anything but right, then swear at anyone who politely points out why they're wrong. I'm surprised you are able to even spell 'humility'.The last thing you need right now is your hypocrisy shining like a beacon.
Z/Anon 10 May 18.45
ReplyDeleteSo you dismiss the findings of the dogs, you dismiss the Supreme Court of Portugal who announced a long time ago that the McCanns have not proved themselves innocent (Kate McCann refused to answer 48 questions the PJ put to her and all the Tapas friends refused to do a reconstruction) and you think they will just walk away from a crime where a child went missing and tell them, yeah, OK, don't worry yourselves you are off the hook, don't worry about poor little Madeleine who you all refused to help, she can go to hell, we'll say that she wasn't worth helping anyway, just as long as you folks are well looked after.
Is that what you mean?
Why is an English Court even being brought into the equation when the crime was committed in Portugal?
Why are you even trying to protect the McCanns when these two were the instigators of what happened to Madeleine. Where is the proof that there was even an "abduction"?
I think the dogs know far more than you do.
Anonymous11 May 2019 at 00:39
ReplyDelete''So you dismiss the findings of the dogs, you dismiss the Supreme Court of Portugal who announced a long time ago that the McCanns have not proved themselves innocent''
No, I didn't dismiss what you're trying to say I dismissed. What I said was that the dogs didn't find evidence. That's a fact.They made indications in areas that could be worth deeper investigation. The Supreme Court told announced that their ruling was only concerned with Amaral's right to print an opinion and that it would need a trial in a criminal court to determine the guilt or innocence of anyone and that their ruling wasn't to be considered anything more than the McCanns failure to prevent the publication of Amaral's book.
KM was well within her rights to refuse to answer questions.The police are well within their's to question her at any time they like about the disappearance of Madeleine.
''don't worry about poor little Madeleine who you all refused to help, she can go to hell, we'll say that she wasn't worth helping anyway, just as long as you folks are well looked after.''
That's an invented scenario.
''Why is an English Court even being brought into the equation when the crime was committed in Portugal?''
It wasn't by me.
''Why are you even trying to protect the McCanns when these two were the instigators of what happened to Madeleine. Where is the proof that there was even an "abduction"?''
Quote me where i tried to protect anyone.
''I think the dogs know far more than you do.''
You imagine far more than you actually 'know'.
Z
Z
ReplyDeleteYou're becoming very boring and I think you need help. Don't you have any other purpose in life than writing reams and reams of fluff to make yourself seem important.
We all know you're doing it deliberately to stop any real discussion on the board, a real true McCann tactic. They're just as predicable as you and have been for the past 12 years.
Please tell us where is the evidence of Madeleine's "abduction" other than the McCanns said she was.
We don't want 100 paragraphs, a few lines will do.
The real problem we have , its as clear as day sadly that grange are looking the other way , when Scotland Yard said , the Mc's were investigated by the PJ and waffle waffle. , I think we all though possible double bluff , but they have had the DNA offer for fourteen moths , and have ignored it , they are asking for more tax payers money without following up an important lead , they are just looking it seems for someone any one to pin it on the PJ just can't be arsed anymore D
DeleteAnonymous11 May 2019 at 16:44
Delete''You're becoming very boring and I think you need help. Don't you have any other purpose in life than writing reams and reams of fluff to make yourself seem important.''
Guess how much i value your opinion. How important I am isn't an issue for me. You brought it up. It must be one for you. Do you feel threatened ?
''We all know you're doing it deliberately to stop any real discussion on the board, a real true McCann tactic.''
Who comprises the 'all' in 'we all' ? Are speaking for a team ? can they not speak for themselves ? Or are you just assuming superiority over them ?Why do you fear anyone who doesn't support the anti point of view ? Is it because they mention evidence ?
'' They're just as predicable as you and have been for the past 12 years.''
One brief sentence that manages to illustrate just how deep paranoia can set in if exposed too long to the internet.
''We don't want 100 paragraphs, a few lines will do.''
I understand the problems of having a short attention span. I used to help people with it. But they were worth the effort.I'm afraid you aren't.If you can't summon up the stamina to learn, just scroll past.
Z