Tuesday 24 February 2015


There you go Tone, your expose of my officially being an egotist is not getting much interest on your forum, so I will put it here :)

In a series of tweets last summer, I disagreed with Brenda Leyland about the Richard T. Hall, Buried by the Mainstream videos, her argument being that it was my ego that prevented me from backing and promoting this series of videos that claimed to expose the truth behind the Madeleine McCann mystery.

It wasn't.  It was Richard's use of Tony Bennett's appalling and biased research that pointed the finger at the first arguido Robert Murat via the Smith family who saw a man carrying a child on the night Madeleine disappeared.  The implication being that the Smith family were lying to protect their 'friend' Robert Murat.  It has of course since been proved that Tony Bennett was in fact investigating the WRONG Smith family, ergo, Video 3 (iirc) of the 4 piece is a load of bollocks.  Sorry Richard, but you should have checked.

Whilst there was a lot of good work within the videos, an error of that magnitude destroyed the rest. My sympathy lies with Richard, but I could not in all good conscience, promote the videos, because:

a)  They were giving out the wrong information.

b)  I consider individuals investigating (stalking) witnesses in a high profile criminal investigation to be fundamentally wrong on every level. 

c)  I consider publishing the findings of such stalking, ie, the personal, financial and confidential details of potential witnesses for the Crown, on a public message board, morally bankrupt, and if not criminal, then it should be.

d)  I do not feign affection.  That is, I will only praise that which genuinely impresses me and I'm afraid these videos didn't because I was niggled by the errors and they were far too long.  If I say something is brilliant, when it isn't, then that will reflect on my own reputation. 

It is appalling now to see Tony elevate Brenda Leyland to sainthood because she became a victim of this case.  She wasn't.  She was an ordinary woman, no different to most of us, but on occasion she went too far.  That sadly, is probably one of the reasons she was selected as the 'example'.  I was not a fan, but the only exchange I can recall with her, was our disagreement over the Mainstream videos.  And incidentally, why hasn't Tony put my tweets alongside Brenda's?  He is showing only half the conversation!

I am sure that if Brenda and I had got to know each other, we would have had much in common but such is the nature of social media, we are all but ships that pass in the night.  I was shocked and appalled when Sky News pounced on Brenda, and I tweeted my support for her, because no-one deserved that. 

I would be curious however to know Mr. Bennett's views in the aftermath of Sky News, that intervening period before Brenda was found dead.  In fact, I would be interested to see the 'views' and 'tweets' of a number of antis at that time, because I had more than a taste of it myself following the Sun article. 

For the critics, yes, tis boring having to rebut Mr. Bennett's allegations, and being called an egotist is one of the more amusing and less harmful among them.  But it is sickening that he is using Brenda Leyland in this way and that he caused so much damage to the work of Richard T. Hall.  If I were Richard, I would edit it to the bone and re-launch it as one video focussing on the truth and avoiding armchair theorists. 


  1. I thought that there was only the briefest mention of the Smith sighting at the end of video 3; is that not the case?

    Has Tony ever explained why it is so vital for him to discredit the integrity of the Smith family and what they may or may not have seen?

    1. Hi Kerry, I seem to remember some '6 degrees of separation' links between a Golf Club in the Algarve and several of the main characters.

      Tony has never explained to my knowledge. But he is a conspiracy theorist in the extreme sense. He has latched onto the zeitgeist, Paedophiles and Perverts are this century's witches, the common enemy used to stir up an angry mob. That most P&Ps are solitary misfits who are afraid of their own shadows matters not, they should burn!

      Tony believes that there is a P&P ring/chain that runs from Robert Murat (who had iffy porn on his computer) right to the heart of Government. He cannot accept that this case could be as simple as a tragic accident, then a cover up that went out of control.

      He is right of course. There is/was a cover up, of that there can be no doubt, but Tony's reasons for it, are in my opinion, wrong. The case of missing Madeleine was seized on by opportunists with their own agendas. Organisations such as CEOP, find it hard to justify their existence if photogenic toddlers fail to go missing. Have a look at the Wiki list of global kidnappings to see just how rare they are. Beneath Madeleine's cherubic little face lay the subliminal message, 'this could happen to your child too - give generously'.

      Our need to protect our children overrides our sense of logic, the incumbent government of the day was leading us up the 'lets all DNA'd' path, and while we are it bring in stricter border controls via Amber Alert'. The McCanns were used as much as they were using but to all intents and purposes it looks as though they have been abandoned.

  2. Kerry - it was at the end of Video 4 and all Richard said was that there was some doubt about the Jane Tanner and Smith family sightings - the Smiths because they had not reported it for 12 days - which is fair enough I suppose. Richard has obviously got most of his info from TB so doubt is cast on RM, which I must say I agree with. I didn`t agree with Cristobel that it was enough to discredit the whole series of DVDs. Richard did say he was going to do a whole documentary on RM, which I`m looking forward to. I hope he does his own research to back up what he`s told by TB.

  3. Cristobell, as a 'journalist' why can't you research Richard's name properly? It's Richard D Hall, not Richard T Hall. It's really not difficult to get one letter correct.

    1. I can be a bit pedantic at times but T instead of D doesn't phase me! I noticed on a topic recently on CMoMM that Tony referred to him as D Richard Hall.

    2. Jesus M Christ. Lighten up, everyone. Oh, sorry, that should be Jesus H Christ.

    3. It really doesn't matter how you spell Richard's name. Why would anyone would give any credence to a guy who believes in human reptiles, the illuminati and aliens? Richard T/D Hall is clearly delusional and his videos about the Madeleine McCann case do not contain anything 'new'. It's all been said before.

  4. The best documentary film EVER on the Madeleine McCann case - and you rubbish it because you think Richard Hall used some of TB's research? You attack CMOMM, Bennett, Hall, you go in the Sun newspaper and tell everyone what a vicious anti-McCan you are...I'm sorry, Ros, it looks to me more like YOU are the one working for Team McCann

  5. Rosalinda, I'm sure you are not working for Team McCann but 21:42 has a point. Can we have more posts about the McCanns and their protectors (many of them among the best and biting I've read about this cover-up) and less launching attacks on Tony Bennet. We all have our own opinion of the child's demise -and what we should and should not do in terms of action. Ultimately, you, Bennet, Hall, any other pundits don't matter. The outcome of this case will be determined agendas of the British and Portuguese governments.

    1. I don't work for anyone 00.03 and I have my own blog because it gives me the freedom to say exactly what I want without someone else's censorship.

      As for writing about Tony, as long as he keeps throwing out wild, defamatory statements about me, I will rebut them. Whilst I agree it would be far more noble to keep silent, that 'silence' goes over most people's heads and the mud sticks.

      Also, I see Tony as part of the cover up in this case 00.03, he is part of the McCann Disinformation Machine, whether they want him or not. Should this case ever reach trial, the evidence of the Smith family may be pivotal and as history have proved time and again, things can be swayed by buffoons.

      As for writing about the case, like everyone else 00.03, I wait with bated breath for the outcome of the damages trial in Lisbon. It is a time for the Portuguese Justice system to show the UK, just who is the unjust third world country when it comes to libel law, and I hope to God they do.

      It is not often that I pray, except on days when I wus out and return to my inner catholic, but I pray for Goncalo Amaral's triumph, he is a hero in every sense of the word. A man who stood up to injustice and lies, putting everything he had on the line rather than give in to the stinking corruption that was hiding the death of a little girl. He is Madeleine's Avenger and he deserves to have his good name restored, he is an honourable man, and he has never given up on the true victim in this case.

      As for Kate and Gerry. The pressure on them right now must be immense, and in many ways they have my sympathy. On days I am not a Catholic (or Buddhist) I am a humanitarian and it doesn't take too much to work out that their lives right now must be hell. Some may be close to breaking point, but the 'leader(s)' are ordering everyone to the bunker. Its a very delicate situation and not one I wish to add to, we need to be sensitive, a lot of innocents are involved.

      As for UT's assertion that I am 'not a writer', but only a mere 'typist', my SMA (Smart Arsed Son) came up with a much better put down, he compared me to the theory that 100 monkeys with 100 typewriters could eventually produce Hamlet, by saying that with my book, all it took was one monkey and a laptop! :)

    2. UT`s spiteful tirade (which led to the thread being taken off the main forum) will no doubt win the catty award.

    3. Actually, I think I recognise UT from the old AOL boards 10:40, she is far more sophisticated now of course, but not quite so entertaining. Said character was a hooker, with a PhD in Law, 6 Labradors, a saucy website and a part time job (on the tills) in her local supermarket. Her 'knowledge' of law however, still gives lol moments.

      I suspect she knows the hierarchy of a legal firm (tea maker?), and the contempt most fee earners have for their clerical 'non thinking' staff. Fwiw, I never, ever, had the slightest inclination to study, learn, research 'the law' beyond what was necessary, and would drift away to cuckoo land whilst pounding those keys. There must be more boring subjects in the world to study than Law, but at the moment, I can't think of any.

  6. In that case 00:03 we might as well....

    Pack up your theories in a large blue bag (Jerry's)
    And smile, smile, smile, (Jerry & Kate)
    What's the use of worrying? They never WILL find out (we made sure of that)
    So go along with the abduction and.... we'll leave it at that.

    To the tune of wrap up your troubles in your old kit bag!!

    1. The Battle of the Bloggers goes on - images of crossed keyboards at dawn.

      Let he or she who has never told a porkie cast the next stone against the other.

    2. 01.11: I'm not suggesting for one moment one should stop commenting on the case or "pack up" as you put it. Indeed, I inferred I want Rosalind to post more "biting" comments about the McCanns and their protectors and less about Bennet. I don't however buy into her theory that Bennet's actions could ultimately lead to the exoneration of the McCanns should they be ever be brought to trial. One could easily surmise the same about her own actions.