Pee in the Pot, or get off It! Two years on from death of Brenda Leyland

Two years ago this week, Gerry McCann, the father of a missing child, demanded that an example be made of the internet 'trolls' he claimed were hounding and threatening his family online.  The McCann family or a 'group of concerned citizens' had compiled a dossier of 'offenders' and ex head of CEOP Jim Gamble and Sky's Martin Brunt took it from there. This was Jim Gamble's cleansing of social media at it's finest and a taster of his own particular form of justice.

The victim they selected, Brenda Leyland, hadn't in fact committed any crime, she, like myself and thousands of others simply refused to accept the establishment line that Madeleine McCann was abducted by a stranger.  The McCanns and those who assist them, truly believed they could stamp out all their critics with a gang of thugs patrolling the internet and via hard cash in the libel courts. To be fair, for a while there they succeeded. 

Unfortunately for Gerry McCann, Jim Gamble and Martin Brunt, their jackboot, vigilante tactics appalled the public, whatever Brenda had done, she did not deserve a public execution.  They selected Brenda because she was 'ordinary', but it was that ordinariness that made her everyone's mum, nan and aunty - the McCann couple, already seen as cold, were now chilling.

It is bizarre that two years on, Operation Grange seem as far from a conclusion as they were at the outset but probably not surprising.  The grisly details of what happened the night Madeleine disappeared have become the back story, it's what happened from that night onwards, that will make the Chilcott report look like a couple of hours of light reading. 

The incumbent Blair government perverted the course of justice.  There is no nice, or euphemistic way of putting it.  It was obvious to the first two Portuguese policemen on the scene that the abduction was staged, and ten years on, to anyone who looks at the facts without the 'but they are such a nice couple' blinkers, it still is.  The problem Operation Grange have, is that once they point the finger at Gerry and Kate, the entire house of cards will collapse.

What was said during Gerry's one to one chats with PMs Blair and Brown?  Or indeed between Kate and Cherie?  One thing we can be sure of, every word will be kept verbatim.  Are we to believe that two British Prime Ministers, with all the country's top advisors, police and Special Branch, were taken in by Gerry and Kate?  Not only were they taken in, they put the full services of the establishment at Team McCann's disposal.  That's an Oops right up there with Okily Dokily Mr. Bush.  

How many New Labour cabinet ministers were schmoozing the McCanns?  Or police chiefs attending their fund raising events?  Will the highly experienced and decorated Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe and Jim Gamble explain how they were so misled by a couple of tricksters the average housewife could spot within seconds?  The unveiling of a fake abduction would reveal a sea of red faces and a scramble by those who should have known better to find excuses for supporting such an obvious scam. 

I kind of get the predicament Operation Grange finds themselves in and the difficulties they must have in releasing public statements.  At some point they will have to pee in the pot or get off it.  It has been clear for some time that OG are not looking for an abductor, which translates, 'we know who's responsible but we don't have enough to prosecute'.  Gerry's 'Nooooo evidence' mantra seems to be holding up quite well, but you can't keep throwing public money at an investigation that's going nowhere. 

Unfortunately, while the silence of Operation Grange might temporarily hold back the floodgates, (who dare publish while Gerry and Kate have so much on so much power over so many - including Amazon?), the walls of the dam could give at any time, and the entire team could look like procrastinating fools. You can imagine the water cooler chat, 'Seriously! Scotland Yard's finest didn't know?', following The Sun's serialisation of Kate's latest memoir 'Gotcha You Mugs!'. 

Those of us who know more about this case than is healthy, would argue the 'No Evidence' point quite vigorously, a quick google of Madeleine McCann, will not only throw up every rational argument for why the parents were involved, it will do it in alphabetical order and with pictures. 

Whatever is going on behind the scenes in an effort to limit the damage when Madeleine hits the headlines again, should not be used to take out members of the public.  And vigilant groups, even if they are 'establishment' ones, should not have the power to destroy lives. 

If I were Brenda's family, I would still be mad as hell, but I respect their right to privacy.  I think unless you understand the full horrors of the abuse of power in Madeleine's name, we 'McCann geeks' will always seem a little strange. My own adult sons think I am quite bonkers.  When justice finally arrives for Madeleine, Goncalo and all those 'destroyed' by the McCanns and their henchmen, I want to see Brenda's name cleared, public apologies for those vile troll headlines that drove the poor woman to her death.  The use of the word 'troll' has sinister undertones and it will be used unscrupulously by those intent on policing the internet and targeting dissenters.  In the case of Brenda it was used as a warning to others that spectacularly backfired. 

I think on this sad anniversary, it is important to remember the ghastly way in the full might of the establishment and the media were used to destroy the life of an ordinary woman who dared to question an obvious lie. 

RIP Brenda Leyland
  

___________________________________________

RIP BRENDA LEYAND (SWEEPYFACE)

So Sky's rolling news day on McCann trolls has resulted in the death of Brenda Leyland (Sweepyface) a middle aged lady angered by the lies of Gerry and Kate McCann. Seven years on, despite being suspects in the eyes of the rest of the world, in the UK they are still being treated like victims and being compensated financially.  No amount of money will satisfy Gerry and Kate, they have had over £4m, they also want the Laws to be changed so their crimes will never be reported.  We have had a news blackout in the UK for the past 7 years.  Why?

The McCanns didn't have any threats against them or their children.  Their witness claimed this in the Lisbon libel trial, but could not substantiate it.  Several months on, no-one has been arrested or charged for threatening the McCanns.  A bit like the abductor.

The biggest threat they could find to the McCanns was poor old Brenda, an obviously shy, timid lady who clearly presented no danger to the McCanns whatsoever.  But she was to be the scapegoat, the face of the cruel campaign against an innocent family.  She was the line of least resistance - had they doorstepped any of the more outspoken among us, we would have given them an interview they couldn't broadcast, on the hour, every hour, etc without Carter Ruck jumping down their throats - now re-employed by McCanns it seems and kerchinging nicely. 

Did Martin Brunt threaten her? If so, what with?  He had pretty much done the worst thing imaginable, but it clearly left her in great fear.  She fled from her village.  More doorstepping perhaps?  Her past raked up?  Did she have mental health issues?  Did any of her family?  Was she a vulnerable adult in any way? Surely Sky News would not have carried out such a catastrophic public attack without making a few basic checks? 

Were the McCanns going to go after her financially, as they have done with Goncalo Amaral, demand that she sell her house?  Was she facing threats of financial ruin? How could a regular person stand up to Carter Ruck? Her limited 'I thought I was entitled to' - portrayed her as ignorant, but what else did she say when she took the crew inside her house?

What did the police say to her?  Afaik, she was not arrested or cautioned, but did they give her a 'stern' taking to? And how stern was that talk?  Normal people with no criminal record or dealings with the police would be terrified. What Laws did Brenda break, if any?  Lets hope the police taped their interviews with her, if I were her family, I would demand they be revealed at the Inquest - and there should definitely be an Inquest.

However, Jim Gamble's hope of using 'outing' as a device to stop people asking questions about the McCanns, or indeed anything, has spectacularly backfired.  The consequences of such sinister threats have become all too apparent.  I would imagine legal talks are frantically underway as we speak, Sky News cannot just brush this off, they must at the very least, issue an apology to Brenda's family.  No Court in the world (maybe N.Korea or UK under McCann Rule) would have found Brenda guilty of anything.  If worse tweeters exist, then why didn't Sky go after them, why go after a fragile, quiet lady in a pretty village, who clearly posed no threat to the McCanns whatsoever.  The cynic in me pictures the McCanns looking up the property prices as one reason, but more likely the subliminal message was 'it could be you'.  There were threatening undertones in that news report, and more than a tinge of cruelty in the way the story was reported.  They couldn't hide their glee at exposing a respectable middle aged lady as a vicious internet troll to all her friends, family and neighbours. It was pitchforking at its very worst.

However, any gleeful thoughts Gamble and McCanns may have of outing people on a regular basis must now be treated with the seriousness it deserves, as Brenda's tragic death has proved.  The punishment Brenda received (based on no evidence) was way beyond anything a Court could have dished out.  It seemed more like payback, than a genuine news story,  Her face, and home, was broadcast every hour, on the hour, as she was publically labelled as a 'Hater', continually hounding the family of Madeleine McCann.  She wasn't.  She was angry at this blatant miscarriage of justice as many are.  Nothing she did deserved the kind of punishment she received.  The death of a child is always emotive, especially when those charged to uphold the law appear to be covering it up. Sky News acted as Judge, Jury and Executioner.  Brenda is dead because of what she was accused of, not because of what she did.  She probably said a lot more in that Sky interview than 'I thought I was entitled to', but will we ever know?  They wanted to label her as evil, and they did.
 
Brenda, bless her, knowingly or unknowingly, may well set off a chain of events that will bring about the final downfall of the McCanns and their minions.   Jim Gamble and the McCanns wanted to use her as an example of what will happen to anyone criticising them, but her suicide has turned the tables.  Now they have to justify what they have done to her. 

HOW MANY PEOPLE SCARED AWAY from questioning the McCanns?

Well first of all, I'm surprised the McCanns had to hire lawyers Carter Ruck, I thought they had them on a permanent retainer.

Also very strange how the big bully media has given them £55k from the one hand, and dedicated a day's news to them from the other - wonder if it was all part of the deal?  The McCanns firmly believe that the more they get their story (and faces) out there, the more chance they have of turning public opinion back in their favour.  There is a certain glee in that for some of us because we can see that they are in fact digging themselves into an even deeper hole. 

Yesterday, we had a day's whitewashing from Sky News, almost every hour, on the hour, possibly accompanied by a subliminal 'you will believe' message to further hypnotise the especially dozy.  Then we had the imposing presence of Jim Gamble ramming home the menace and bullying message just to make it absolutely clear, that they will go after anyone questioning the official story.  How many perfectly innocent people with legitimate questions about Madeleine's disappearance been scared away by these shock tactics?  The message was clear.  Anyone tweeting negatively about the McCanns will come to the attention of the police. We are all under surveillance because we don't believe the ridiculous abduction story.

And just to hammer the message home, Gerry and Kate have again received a substantial payment from a UK newspaper, said by them to have been donated to a charity (which one?) and they are back up on their pedestal demanding the newspaper industry be gagged.  The only people who want newspapers gagged are those with something to hide.  What kind of police state are we turning into where journalists are imprisoned and every story has to be run by the subject, before it can go to press?

Its not the tories demanding the media gags, they have running the gauntlet with press barons since time began, its New Labour and the increasingly more sinister Hacked Off.  A public that votes to gag the free press, is a public walking blindly into police controlled State. 

A free press comes with good and bad, those used to the limelight, or born to it, treat it with the same attitude as the Windsors, 'Don't Complain', Don't Explain'.  Those who choose to put their private lives in the public domain, again and again, invite public comment, especially those who pose for 'Hello' style photoshoots and tell the world 'I couldn't make love to my husband'.  The McCanns make themselves the news, ergo comment will follow. 

The press do not persecute and intimate victims of crime.  Sadly, our history is littered with tragic stories of children taken and murdered, and their families have continued their lives, devastated, but with the privacy they asked for. 

The problem the McCanns have (apart from megalomania) is their inability to accept that the public just don't like them and their constant whining about what a bad deal they have had ain't helping.  The public know who has had a bad deal - I remember seeing the Ben Needham tweeter asking for donations for a PC ffs.  Yet keep the sympathy and cash (£4m+ to their private company) with Gerry and Kate.  Perhaps Gerry and Kate could give the cash to them?

MCCANN TROLLS ON TWITTER

So Sky News have once more dedicated a day's news to the suffering of Gerry and Kate McCann, the tortured parents of missing people's poster girl Madeleine McCann.  A couple who left their children alone while they went out to dine and a couple who spent the night phoning the press while others searched for their missing daughter. 

For seven years these parents have taken every opportunity to grab the front pages, by whatever means, and the morning after the poor, battered body of Alice Gross is found, we get saturation news coverage of, err, the McCanns.

But lets take a closer look at these 'trolls'.  I am one of them.  I use my own name and picture and none of my tweets are aggressive, rude or, God forbid, threatening.  Look at my timeline Mr. Brunt, in fact look at the timelines of the majority of anti's on the McCann hashtag - you will see that they are ordinary, decent people who simply refuse to buy into this scam and who will not allow such a blatant miscarriage of justice. 

This is the age of information Mr.  Brunt, and anyone with the gumption to look beneath the headines, can see that this was a cover up on a major scale, and that people such as yourself are trying to hoodwink us.  Why Mr. Brunt?  Unfortunately for the powers that be, the people do have a voice, and none of us will be persuaded by these sledgehammer tactics of labelling disbelievers haters and trolls. 

I suggest anyone interested in this story should check out the internet group who compiled this dossier - Stop the Myths, JATKY2 - read their forums, and then try to justify these Groups, Mr. Brunt.  You will find quite a few pages relating to myself, together with a variety of obscene, photoshopped pictures of me.  Tell me Mr. Brunt, is it not considered vile behaviour if it comes from supporters of the McCanns?  When I lost my mother I spent an evening with a group of them trying to persuade me to commit suicide?  Is that still OK with you and Mr. Gamble? 

I will never know if my book Cry and You Cry Alone - a memoir of my time in care - was good or bad, because of my McCann stance.  I was the 'evil' one.  I never look at my own Amazon page, because they did their worst. So Summers and Swan you are not the first authors to have been targeted in this case and it wasn't even about the McCanns. 

It is absolute nonsense to suggest that the McCanns or their children are being threatened - 99% of those who do not believe the McCanns are normal people who conduct themselves with the same courtesy and civility as they would in the real world.  Sky, or whoever is the source of this story, has picked out 1% of the online commentary on the McCann case, and remarks by the way, that none of the recognised Madeleine forums would ever tolerate.  It in no way represents the majority of people who do not believe the McCanns. 

You must be feeling like one of those biblical preachers Mr. Brunt, telling the masses that there was an old guy in the sky watching their every movement. It might have worked in those days Mr. Brunt, but the British public now have Google and Joana Morais.    






 

READ THE BOOK NOT AVAILABLE IN THE UK

The Summers and Swan book Looking for Madeleine hit the bookshelves in the UK last week, a book that claims to give the definitive account of what happened to Madeleine, approved and rubber stamped by the parents, their spokesman Clarence Mitchell, and their number One fan Jim Gamble, the former head of CEOP.

I haven't read the book, nor will I.  When its release coincided with comments from the former Police Chief who has assisted the McCanns throughout, it came across as the story endorsed by the authorities in the same way that books had to be approved in Stalinist Russia.  Any book approved of and recommended by 'The State' should be read with a huge pinch of salt (if you have the time) or discarded if you don't.  In my opinion, its as much a part of the 'McCanns are Innocent' narrative as the phoney detectives, phoney sightings, and phoney abductors.

But those aren't the only reasons I won't buy it.  When I began following this case 7 years ago, the internet was buzzing with blogs, forums - hundreds, if not thousands of people with their own individual theories.  It became impossible to keep up, and on top of which, I get very irritated if I have taken the time  and trouble to read volumes of pages, only to discover the writer is clearly barmy and has come up with an even more ludicrous scenario than the McCanns.  I hold grudges.  I have still not forgiven M. Night Shyamalan and Mark Wahlberg* for The Happening - 2 hours of my life I will never get back!

If you want a clear idea of what this case is all about, you have to sort the wheat from the chaff.  If a theorist comes up with something that 'might' have happened and discards the alerts by the blood and cadaver dogs, I recommend you stop reading.  Ditto, the idea that there was someone in PDL soooooo important that the intelligentsia have closed ranks to protect them. I mean seriously, someone with more State protection than the US President and the Prince of Wales going to an off season holiday camp in Portugal for a bit of nooky - Really?

If you want to spare yourself 24/7 reading, and believe me there is that much material out there, you can do no better  than the McCann files, Joana Morais, Blacksmith Bureau and 'Only in America, Teddy' and Pamalam who incurred McCanns' wrath by saving all of Gerry's blogs - well worth an afternoon of reading you will never forget.  Links to these sites will shortly be available on blog.  Good Quality Wristbands was also cracker - though not live afaik, it still contains some brilliant articles as too the terrific website of Ironside, Steel Magnolia who has now sadly passed away.

For discussion, Madeleine McCann Mystery, and also the Jill Havern forum, which still has some excellent posters, if you ignore the ones who have concluded the case (before the police).  But no more wars - please! 

For the truth, and to spare yourself the entire police files or propaganda books, read the first hand account of someone who was actually there and right in the thick of it.  The lead detective, Goncalo Amaral, a man born to write.  His work has the easy going charm of a fireside chat with an interesting and wise old friend - you swish the pages as quickly as you can, inwardly shouting, tell me more, tell me more.

Goncalo Amaral's book, The Truth of the Lie** is the definitive book on the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.  Dr. Amaral - yes, Dr. Goncalo is a highly educated man, the complete opposite in fact of everything that has been written about him in the UK press.  One of life's gentlemen, his book has been translated by volunteers and made freely available online. That he has not clamped down on them legally (thus far) negates the McCanns argument that he wrote his book for profit.  Dr. Amaral wrote his book so the whole world would know the truth of the lie. His focus has always been the little girl who disappeared, the child who lost her life.  Some might say he is Madeleine's Avenger - the antithesis of all those who trying so hard to prevent the truth of her disappearance being known.

Dr. Amaral was the co-ordinating detective in the original Portuguese investigation, his position was made untenable by the interference of the British Government and his name has been demonised by the McCanns and those who assist them, ever since.  He was too close to the truth and he had to go. The Truth of the Lie is based on the Portuguese investigation files (police files also freely available online) and gives a first hand account of the way in which the McCanns came to be Arguidos and the author's plans to follow up the little known sighting by an Irish family on the night Madeleine disappeared.  The stage Scotland Yard seemed to have reached in last October's Crimewatch.

The real question of course, is why this book 'Looking for Madeleine' is being published and distributed in the UK, whilst the true story of Madeleine's disappearance is only available to the English speaking population online? Could it be that the McCanns through their vexatious use of lawyers have prevented 'The Truth of the Lie' from going on sale in English and in the UK? They have fought Dr. Amaral in the Courts for 5 years, to prevent his book being published and for compensation of £1m+ for the distress he has caused them and their missing daughter.  The lunatics on STMs and JATYK2 (hilarious pro site filled with the best of the pros (6 tops)) are now protesting about book burning and fascism, whilst failing to see the irony of their support for the banning Dr. Amaral's book and Hacked Off!     











*Mark Wahlberg has seen redeemed himself with 'Ted' :)

**http://frommybigdesk.blogspot.co.uk/ - Free English translation of Goncalo Amaral's book - though I urge everyone to buy the hard copy of the book as soon a publisher is brave enough to print it.  Should that day ever arrive, I will display it on my bookshelves like a trophy!

TIME TO MOVE ON FROM BENNETTGATE

Now that the dust has settled and Candyfloss has now provided us with a new, friendly forum ( its time to call a truce.  Hopefully everyone had the opportunity to say that which was simmering away inside them (I was one of them) and we can concentrate on doing what we are all here for.  Getting justice for the little girl who disappeared and focus our efforts on those responsible for the cover up.

Whether Tony was up to no good will remain a mystery, like everything else in this case, we will have to wait for it all to come out in the wash.  It doesn't really matter in the whole scheme of things, its a bit like a cinema audience fighting amongst themselves in order to change the ending of the film.  Utterly pointless. 

Although I have been around this case for 7 years, this has been the first and only time, I have ever followed a major crime and it has been an enlightening experience.  It opened up a whole new world I had no idea existed and if I wasn't convinced about the McCanns' guilt before, I certainly was when I encountered online the criminally insane people who protected them. 

The first forum I posted in was like a gladiatorial arena, it had pros and antis posting together and it had no moderators.  It was where I developed my (now 3 stone lighter) rhinoceros hide and the ability to squish trolls on twitter.  Looking back on it, I'm not altogether sure whether people on the AOL Europe board believed the McCanns one way or the other, or just liked to fight a lot. 

But back on message.  Tony's investigation will have no relevance to the real one and I doubt SY read the lengthy tomes he sends to them.  Very few people believe Tony's theories, and if he was muddying the prosecution case (deliberately or otherwise) by discrediting the main witnesses, then he has failed.  The Smith family maintain their dignity and followers of this case are left wondering what he is up to.  The investigation continues. 



http://maddiemccannmystery.forumotion.co.uk/



Still trying to get this on blog :)

DID TB GIVE JUDGE LIST OF ANTI'S?

I left CMoMM because I objected, on moral grounds, to Tony Bennett's harassment of the witnesses in this case and I was soon to discover many others left for similar reasons or were simply whooshed for voicing an alternate opinion.  My exit however was slightly more dramatic as I had the means to reply. 

I have allowed this subject to continue on my blog, as it has proved to be very enlightening indeed, and much as I would like to drop the matter and move on, I am driven to discover what exactly Tony has been up to, and on who's behalf?  I am hoping the anonymity of this blog will encourage more to come forward with what they know.  Where did it all begin, at the Mirror forum, the 3 Arguidos?

Does anyone remember Tony handing over a list of anti names at his trial in London.  It was hot gossip on the cesspit pro forums, but not picked up on CMoMM, most of us at that time were too pre-occupied in sympathising with the injustice heaped on TB by Carter Ruck and the McCanns to question the minutiae of the Judgement, and in any event, we had Tony to deconstruct it for us. 

Was there a list?  I don't care about my name being on it, I would have failed in my campaigns against injustice if it weren't, but others do care, and guard their privacy with passion.  Quite right too, The queues for the gallows would be unmanageable if the entire population declared themselves Spartacus.  The martyr route takes a certain kind of dedication and madness.  We are few, and mostly bonkers.  As a catholic child I determined to die burning at the stake like my heroine Joan of Arc for a great and noble cause, only I wasn't quite sure what it would be - I was rapidly going off religion.  But I digress, the simple explanation is that most people are too busy living their lives and enjoying their families to become the target of crackpots.  Those of us who put our names, know what to expect.

The word 'list' for me comes in the same sinister category as the word 'ban' - that is, words I despise. I've always found it somewhat absurd that one adult can believe they have the power to 'ban' another adult from doing as they wish.  The word 'list' is reminiscent of good old Joe McCarthy and the Hollywood witch hunts, 'give us the names of your mates, and we'll let you off'.  The honourable ones chose prison and ruination, indeed one said, he could give them a list [of his friends] but he wouldn't be able to face himself in the morning.  Quite. 

Tony now sees himself as Emile Zola, and we are his accusers, kudos to him for the dramatic twist, but the questions remain unanswered and I want to know more about the 'List' and the agreement of Carter Ruck to write off nearly £300k in legal fees.  Tony pointed out during his legal battles with the McCanns that he was far from alone in not believing the abduction story. which is fair enough - why should he alone be punished, he wasn't the only one - its the standard reply of the tell tale kids in the playground. But why volunteer the information that he knew the 'real' names of many others?  That's simply not cricket. 

I don't want a war against Tony, and I won't publish aggressive or juvenile posts.  However, I think there is a lot he is not telling us, and indeed, I feel we have been misled.  This isn't personal, I have always thought of Tony as a passionate, if somewhat eccentric, campaigner for justice - though I have to confess I have not studied his work in any great detail as I fundamentally disagree with almost everything he says.  That's not to say I disliked him, he is an interesting character, but his behaviour may not have been as harmless as I thought, and I want to know the truth. 

MYTHS AND LEGENDS - PART II

Many thanks to JJ, for another brilliant insight into the myths created by Tony Bennett:

JJ

More Myths and Legends of Tony Bennett

 

Many of you believe TB is a meticulous researcher in the search for the truth regarding MM, but is there evidence to support this?

 

There is an unrelenting onslaught on the ‘lies’ of the Smith family and the ‘blatant lies’ of Robert Murat.  But why doesn’t he ever want you to remember the pernicious campaign waged against RM by the Macs and Tapas 7?

 

One of TB’s diversions is to analyse every tiny mistake in anything RM has said, such as he forgot to mention he went to the bank, therefore he is party to child abduction. Another is he agreed with the Macs to be the fall guy in exchange for £600,000.  Are we really to believe anyone would admit to abducting and killing a child and spending the rest of their life in prison for money?  Most would think it ludicrous.

 

But there is abundant evidence the Macs and Tapas 7 deliberately chose Murat as their scapegoat, but this is not considered.

 

TB never fails to repeat the story again and again that JT, RO, FP, ROB, all changed their minds about their identification of Murat at the end of 2007.

 

You will note that recently Richard D Hall made several  DVD’s,  entitled “Buried By the Mainstream Media” in which much valuable insights and information was placed in the public domain, but then Hall reduces his credibility to zero by quoting facts straight from the myths book of Bennett.  Among these myths are that both Murat and Gerry’s phones were switched off for the same 32 hours.

 

Total tosh, a TB myth.

 

When he first wrote this on CMOMM, Friday 8 January 2010, TB said “here is a little known fact that needs more public exposure”.  Somebody had the audacity to reply, “the reason it is a little known fact, is because it’s not true”

Information followed from the PJ and phone companies proving Gerry’s phone was switched on but as usual TB continued with his lies.

No discussion, it is not permitted.

Hall then quotes the fact that by the end of 2007 the Tapas group were all singing from the same hymn sheet and that they now knew it was not Murat they saw that night.

 

TB started this myth on JH,  that by the end of 2007  all the Tapas had changed their stories it was not Murat they saw.  TB repeats this time and time again and people actually  believe it.

As a researcher, he even investigated a company formed by Martin Smith in 1991, as in his opinion, it had relevance to Madeleine, 16 years later,this is astonishing.

 

So if TB is right, and the Tapas all retracted their identification of Murat, at the end of 2007, how does Bennett  explain their rogatory statements, given to the Leicestershire Police in April 2008 and Kate’s book “madeleine” in 2011.

 

TB always tries to minimise their id of Murat saying simply, they were mistaken.

 

Now read the 2008 statements of Fiona Payne and Rachael Oldfield, where they state “the man came up to me, shook me by the hand and said I am Robert Murat”.

 

How can this be a mistake?  It is a clear attempt by them to wrongly blame and implicate Murat.  This is a criminal offence in Portugal, called calumny and is punishable by a jail sentence,  In the UK it is called Conspiracy to Pervert the Course of Justice.

 

Does Kate in her 2011 book, say they were mistaken.

 

No, she does not.

 

Can Bennett produce any police statement, where they have retracted their id of Murat?

 

No, he cannot.

 

As usual he has made it up as Bennett wants you to look anywhere except at the Macs and Tapas 7. 

 

You need to ask him why?

 

He has been told many times he was wrong but did he recheck his facts? 

 

No, he did not.

 

Now he is using Hall to peddle his nonsense.  How is this helping to discover the truth by undermining a valuable piece of work by RDH?

 

Payne and Oldfield committed a criminal conspiracy in order to implicate Murat TB does not want anyone looking there, hence his deceit.

 

This id holds the key to the whole mystery. Why did they deliberately lie?  And how they came to do so.  It was not a mistake, remember “he came up to me, shook me by the hand and said I am Robert Murat” 

 

Where in all of Bennetts copious work does it come up for discussion?

 

If any Police force needs a point to start, here is positive proof of a criminal offence.  Why has it been ignored?

 

I am surprised Bennetts research has not pointed out of the three separate groups of the Tapas 7, one each has certainly committed a criminal offence, perhaps this is a reason for a pact of silence.

 

But of course, in Bennett world, they never gave these statements.  In ROB’s rogatory statement in April 2008, ROB states “Murat that night broke up a fracas with some English and the GNR.

 

Murat told him he had a daughter of the same age, mentioned his wife was in Norfolk with his daughter.   Rachel and Fiona have vehement views on Murat and said he was a translator for the British Police”.

 

They sure meant to leave ‘no stone unturned’ in setting Murat up.

 

Murat has been thoroughly investigated by the British and Portuguese Police and nothing has been found to link him to Madeleine but Bennett insists he will continue to dissect Murat’s school life, business life, social life, present wife, ex wife and on and on and on.

 

Of Martin  Smith he examines in such detail the lives of Smiths fellow company directors, from years ago as having relevance.  Smiths daughter, 12 at the time, has her school work examined in great detail and is labelled a liar on numerous occasions.

 

But of two women who by their own police statements, have committed a criminal offence, which has a direct bearing on the mystery of Madeleine McCann, nothing, absolutely nothing.

 

Either Bennett is the worst researcher ever, or he has been given an agenda not to draw any attention to the stitch up of Robert Murat by the Macs and their friends.

 

Draw your own conclusions.

 

This is a brief resume (sorry Cristobell) on one aspect of Bennetts misinformation misdirection half truths and lies and there is much much more.  The myths and legends of TB could run and run.

 

Many thanks to Cristobell for her bravery in allowing another point of view to have an airing.