Tuesday 2 June 2015



So the justice seekers are once again the sick trolls according to the headline of tomorrow's Daily Star and Jerry Lawton.  The reasons why they have raised £25k+ and rising have been obscured once more by the martyrdom and continuing pain of Kate and Gerry McCann.  A couple to whom no amount of money is ever enough. Over £4m has passed through their non transparent Fund, most of it spent on protecting the parents' reputation and seeking vengeance on anyone who dares to criticise them. 

In supporting Goncalo Amaral, the public finally have a way in which to show how disgusted they are at the cover up that appears to have the entire British establishment in its grip.  They know the newspapers are lying to them and they want to know why.   

I don't believe the McCanns
But lets turn to the real trolls in this case.  The small gang of internet thugs who have guarded the McCanns reputation by patrolling social media sites seeking out the more vocal, crushing them with threats of 'naming and shaming', and proving they meant business, by selecting the harmless Brenda Leyland as an example. 

In the words of Gerry, it was a disaster, most of those who saw what happened did indeed think, 'yeh, Brenda was just like me, and she didn't deserve that'. You see we are not the sick trolls.  We believe that little 3, nearly 4, year old girl deserved a chance to live.  We do not accept that a little girl can just disappear with no-one held accountable.  Like Goncalo Amaral we want to know what happened to Madeleine and we are not stupid enough to believe the McCann lies.  Who are the bad guys?  The ones who seeking justice for the child, or the ones covering up the circumstances of her disappearance?  Isn't it kind of sick to cover up a child's death?

But lets take a closer look at the McCanns publicity campaign, or more particularly the anonymous gang/army of self appointed guardians who defend the MCann family so vigorously online.  Or at least the hardcore who remain, the ones who do it just for fun - they are so crap at what they do, I don't think anyone would pay them.   
The pro McCann sites are a funny little circle of Uriah Heeps that's for sure, lol.  I can almost picture them sitting there eating worms as their world closes in. Sites such as STMs and JATYK2 are dark, murky and very strange places indeed, the 'characters' are surreal, nameless and faceless, their fear of exposure is palpable.  The raging Tigerloaf, shivering in his/her cowardly boots while demanding that ALL McCann sceptics be named and publicly shamed - demanding for others that which he/she fears the most.

Why the terror of exposure?  What are they afraid of?  They demand that our publishers, employers, family, friends, neighbours etc, be made aware of our beliefs on the McCann case, yet they are so ashamed/fearful of their own.  Do their families, employers, neighbours know what they do?

If their cause is honourable and their motives good, why not use their own names and faces?  If people were attacking my family, friends or those I love or admire, I would not hesitate to stand proudly beside them.  And I wouldn't have been in the slightest bit bothered by Martin Brunt turning up on my doorstep with a camera crew because I write with honesty and integrity. I KNOW I haven't written anything I would be ashamed of.  The best and the most important 'writing' advice I have ever received or given by the way.  You never have to delete anything.

As protective as the creatures on JATYK2 are of their real characters, they often give insightful little snippets away and it is at times like these I can see how pitiful they really are.  For students of psychology, psychopathy and what it is that makes people evil, these sites make fascinating studies.

Naturally, I especially pick up on the comments directed at myself (my own narcissism, lol),  The reasons people hate me now are exactly the same as they were, when I was 5/10/15/55, there is a pattern.  I am attractive, confident and articulate and I don't know/refuse to accept my 'place'.  And anyone with similar traits will know exactly what I am talking about, and can like myself spot the 'usual' enemy in a nanosecond. I never changed for any of them in the past, and I'm not going to do it for the new ones now, lol.  I don't want to be a sheep, I want to be 'special' - my daddy told me I was, and I'm gonna be!  I eschew society's codes and conventions and I laugh out loud at Bureaucracy - that seems to upset some people, especially those with state of the art filing systems.  My blunt honesty disarms and frightens some people, it puts them in touch with feelings of their own that they would prefer to keep hidden.  Its much cosier and safer on their side of the fence, with the crowd. 

Embittered women of my age and generation look to me for reasons to continue in their own safe domestic sphere and keep their heads down.  I'm an example of what happens to attention seekers and the scolding I get is my just desserts for stepping out of line, not forgetting of course, its great fun bitching about others.  Think garden fence and 'er down the road, who is no better than she ought to be and you get the gist. Some things never change.   

To a certain section of white middle class men, I am an abomination, a terrible influence on their subjugated wives and a direct threat to the cosy patriarchal status quo.  Unfortunately (and creepily) for me, their underlying fear/loathing of women is  directly linked to their genital area. I'm not special in this regard btw, any adult woman would have the same effect.   

Injustice infuriates me now just as much as it did when I was 5 - if HE can do it, so can I!  I have always taken the side of the underdog, if I could see other kids struggling to say what they wanted, I knew I had the gob on me to say it for them!  For what it is worth, I have instigated rebellions from the playground to the work place to the local town centre, I just can't help myself.  Ergo, I have had the same 'enemies' all my life, only now there are more of them and they are easier to spot.

I have given myself as an example but all of us who have been on the receiving end of the vicious McCann publicity machine will recognise everything I have said.  The stalking, the Blacklist, the Death Dossier all emanate from the pro McCann side of the fence, but you already know that Jerry.

Trolls are indeed sick, but sicker I think are those journalists who attack decent, caring, law abiding citizens who have the right to ask what the hell is going on.  If the only way to get justice for the little British child Madeleine is through the Portuguese civil courts, then so be it.  The McCanns can't silence everyone.



  1. I have never known a systematic 'huddle' of individuals, plot or scheme against another group*, or should I say I have never been invited to such a group, as we have seen across the net, since the early days of the Mirror forum, as the huddle allege their support to the McCanns.

    But what is so strange, IMHO is the so called anti 'haters' don't exist as a group. There may be some who discuss in tiny pockets of the internet, some who are the guardians of the collated, translated INFORMATION. But they don't plot and scheme tactics against others who don't agree with them.

    Prepare dossiers, get people banned\blocked from specific accounts on twitter, engage in what appears planned offensives & attacks. Take the Gamble\Brunt S&S saga, that ended in the death of Brenda, had Brenda's untimely death not occurred? what then. Would the dossier had progressed to hunting down the hater trolls, as prepared by the huddle. God it makes me shudder - and people wonder why most of us remain 'anon'

    What the gofundme site, should demonstrate, as those who merely have another opinion and wish to voice it, they are individuals. As those individuals change from one forum or platform to another, take note you can't divide and conquer individuals.

    In the greater picture of tactics since the early days of MF Mirror forum, many forms of dissent have been used to divide opinion; not that it matters much. I for example do not believe the £1k donation came from a group of SO's at the MET \ or elsewhere. I see this as a ploy to draw attention, cause hype in other words, throw a spanner in the works. But who cares, thank you for the £1k, but as someone else posted & should be taken as sound opinion it could easily have been £50 with the same post.

    I don't hate the McCanns. I don't know them. But I certainly hate their choice of holiday arrangements for their children. That has passed, that has happened. The here and now is £10m and rising, plus all other millions spent by the LP and Portuguese Authorities has not brought this case to any conclusion. The thin ice now will be the awakening of the general public when LIVE individuals are refused life saving treatments, due to protocol of 'precious resources' and the continuance of a 'hiding to nothing' in the case of one missing child. It will not be the well informed demanding answers it with be the general public. But since they are fed crap by MSM change is slow.

    What if we wind the clock back, to the non cooperation of answering the questions by Mrs McCann and the reconstruction refusal\decline by their friends and other witnesses (note: I did not say the McCanns refused). The saga goes full circle and disappears up it's on end! that is at the beginning.

    And really what of dearest little Madeleine McCann? Destined in life to be the image that replaced Princess Diana to sell newsprint.

    1. Many thanks 07:48, poetry in motion! And you have hit so many important points right on the nail. Brilliant!

    2. @ 07:48 - what an enlightened post, thank you.

      The early days of the Mirror Forum were special, we had yet to learn of the Sol article/pact of silence/Mrs. Fenn's observations.

      We were all completely fact starved - what a great leveller that made.

      The tribalisation/the pro/anti camps only emerged when the projected sainthood of the parents started swaying ever so slightly.

      Your point about the 'Princess of hearts' is spot on.

      This might be uncomfortable for some but I believe it's true in this image driven, Kardashian age -

      Had Madeleine been a cross-eyed, buck toothed child with a skin tone other than aryan white - would the case have attracted 1% of the attention it has?.

      Had the doctors been out of work plumbers and the location of the disappearance a satellite town in the depths of the Ukraine - would we,
      'the pundits' have turned up our TVs everytime there was mention of the case?.

      Madeleine is/was the Charles Augustus Lindbergh, Jr.,of the 21st century.

      Both children with all their lives ahead of them, turned icons - to sell shed loads of papers and enhance the careers - and fill the wallets of
      politicians/spinmeisters and lawyers alike.

      Yet, the truth has a niggling and persistent way of coming out.

      The apple, as they say..can bite back.

  2. Follows on from 'I have never known'' ..........

    Just managed to read the 'STARS' contribution to mankind

    ''It is claimed the money came from “an anonymous but very large group of British police officers” said to be “outraged at the way in which a senior investigating officer has been treated”. ''

    Remember the saga of the Weapons of mass destruction and the SEXED UP documents, yes, well TROLLS sexed us the S&S book and now it's a feature of MSM. Probably the average reader of the STAR this falls on stony ground!

    That was the sex & spice of the article, was it!! Trolls & their 'pledged' donations.... pledged. The money was whooooooshed immediately out of their accounts.

    1. Crafty sods using the 'pledge' word eh? Throws a huge question mark over the whole enterprise. Well, lol, Go Fund Me, doesn't work that way, and the public are not daft enough to believe it does (we hope).

      And yes, we have been SEXED UP (love the analogy) - we have been made to look like a band of demons attacking the beautiful heroine and her knights in shining armour (no scruffs in her defence team).

      We are the low life chavs, the hovel dwellers, we are the ones who leave our kids to fend for themselves while we go out on the razz, not people like the McCanns. We are the dole dossers, the benefit scroungers, the mentally deranged. If you are in urgent need of a psychiatrist and/or counselling, tell 'em you don't believe Kate and Gerry and you will get a same day appointment.

      The sexed up labels stuck unfortunately, reinforced by establishment mouthpieces like Lorraine Kelly and Richard Madeley - who happily go along with reinforcing the myth that not believing the McCanns = Hate, end of.

      Their bizarre choice of Brenda Leyland as the victim/example backfired spectacularly. She simply didn't fit the public's preconceived image of an internet troll. The message 'it could be you' worked too well, the public recognised themselves in Brenda and suddenly released that any one of them could be lined up next for a public execution and they horrified!

      If I were the McCanns, I'd sack the spin doctor, because everything they are touching these days becomes toxic.

  3. Ros - you say "I KNOW I haven't written anything I would be ashamed of. The best and the most important 'writing' advice I have ever received or given by the way. You never have to delete anything."

    But isn't it true that you had to delete a post/tweet that you made saying that bennett had called you a c.....after your friends told you that you were wrong?

    1. I can't imagine any circumstances where Bennett would call me a c*** (to my face), lol. I may not like Bennett, but I know using words like that are not in his make up. The whole story sounds like a bit of a fantasy to me. Why would I accuse someone of saying something I know they would never say?

  4. A shrink would have a field day with some of the things you've said here. You seriously need help.

    I know you've said you want to take up where Brenda Leyland left off but for goodness sake, you need to take care of yourself, unless the negative is ultimately what you're aiming for.

    The internet can be a very dark place to hang out.

    1. at 1941

      Deep, dark thoughts - sinister even

      How is the internet different from your bus stop - where you may or may not decide to chat about the weather/Coleridge's poetry or the state of Hungarian politics? With total strangers?

      The blogger provides a platform to express thoughts about the disappearance of Madeleine.

      Why does this irk you so much?

      Ignorance and conforming to the Team McCann brainwash - make for a much darker place than this blog.

      But continue roaming in the gloaming - if that floats your boat.

      As for shrinks - Freud has a LOT to answer for reg. communal angst

      It was a Freud who invented the poison of Public Relations

      It was another Freud who cooked dinner for the doctors - down Algarve way.

      No wonder the Vatican cut them off.

    2. 19:41, No I am not aiming for the ultimate negative, good heavens. I am actively working on my mental and physical health to keep myself alive and strong for those I love, hari kari is nowhere on the agenda.

      I live by the philosophy 'Law of Attraction' - that is, in a nutshell, good vibrations. I have zero tolerance for negativity, I'm ashamed to say, or more accurately, if people are negative, I walk away, life's too short.

      I recently watched 'The Secret' and had a huge 'doh!' moment, in that I wish I had seen it 30+ years ago! I had partially been living by that philosophy albeit I didn't know it at the time. I had put my chirpy nature down to my all time favourite literary character Uncle Dynamite, a character created by P.G. Wodehouse to spread sweetness, light and chaos. It has brought success and disaster in equal measures, lol.

      I am not frightened by the dark and sinister nature of the internet because I have gone to great lengths to understand and make sense of it. Just I won't worship a God I can't see, I won't fear something I can't see either. Those planting the 'fears' have very little, if anything, substantial to back them up.

      Who are these dark and sinister forces? These murky characters sitting in wait for people (anyone) to slip up and reveal something of a personal nature so they can pounce on them? Are they organised gangs or merely an assortment of oddballs and weirdos who like to hang out together?

      What exactly should be I be afraid of? Are we really surrounded by so many Hannibal Lectors? Seriously? Because if we are, then I suggest we all go on lockdown and never venture outside our front doors.

      If someone online spends hours and hours pondering over my every word searching for ways in which to stalk me or catch me out, they are the ones with the problems, not me, lol. I couldn't care less about them.

      The internet isn't something to be afraid of. I have been in the public eye (albeit on a tiny scale) for a long, long time and all those dangers we are warned about rarely, if ever, exist. It is a myth and I genuinely feel sorry for those who have allowed the manmade fear to dominate their lives.

      The case of Chloe Madeley is a good example. What were the parents thinking? Did they tell the hysterical girl 'yes dear, there is a very good chance a weirdo will climb in your bedroom window some time soon' or did they point out that a socially inept misfit, masturbating over her imagine somewhere in cyberland does not in any way affect her life?

  5. 19:41
    Your post sounds very threatening why would that be I wonder?

    You can't stop the tide coming in, along with all those unturned stones no matter how hard you try.

    Truth, and justice, for Madeleine is all people care about... no matter who was responsible for her disappearance.

  6. I wonder how proud bennett is after drawing the public's attention to this sad case.

    Just look at the sick comments http://jillhavern.forumotion.net/t11349p50-amber-peat-13-is-missing

    disgusting creatures.

  7. Bennett is an old man who deserves everything that will happen to him.

  8. I've given up lambasting Tone, way too tedious that business

    He feeds on other's misery and misfortune and has done more than anyone to discredit those sceptical or even just mildly critical of the docs' behaviour.

    Tone's a gift to Carter Ruck and their acolytes, the MSM

  9. The way in which Tony Bennett involves himself in high profile sex crimes/crimes involving children is quite bizarre. Its true that crimes of this nature have a huge audience, but while most of us watch in horror from the sidelines, Tony starts his own investigation.

    For Tony the internet allows him to delve into the private lives of others, pass moral judgement and raise any army of similarly minded self righteous vigilantes. Even before a crime has been established, Tony dismisses the work of the Police as irrelevant and tramples all over the investigation by interfering with and harassing those directly involved, just because he can.

    The man appears to have no moral compass whatsoever, he certainly has no consideration for the people who's lives he meddles in. People who are caught up in a traumatic event through no fault of their own and some who are especially vulnerable.

    Whilst the majority of us use this new age of enlightenment to broaden our minds and find new forms of entertainment, Tony has been able to take his obsession (meddling) to new heights he could never have imagined. Mr. Angry of Harlow no longer needs a long lens set of binoculars or bushes to hide behind, he can pry on others to his heart's content and publish the results. The man's a menace.

  10. Miss Hutton, oh I forgot Rosalinda. What hypocritical tosh! you castigating Bennet for delving into the private lives of others! you labelling him a vigilante! you stating he has no moral compass! etc. etc. Bennett is a nutcase I agree, but I suggest have a good look at yourself. His attacks on the McCanns are child's play compared to your own. Why don't just let the investigation proceed? The very fact that you publish your rants against the McCanns suggests that you are dismissing the Police as irrelevant. You've stated you have faith in the investigation. Then shut up and let The Yard get on with it. I hope when the McCanns are finally cleared, you won't show the same hypocrisy as you do with your anti-Bennet rants and started bleating that the Yard are corrupt. No doubt many of your co-vigilantes will.

    1. I have never interfered with the investigation in any way, shape or form. I had nothing to do with Bennett's Madeleine Foundation and I didn't sign any of his Petitions.

      As long as the crime continues, I will continue to comment, especially if I think there is a danger the crime will be covered up. The McCanns have hurt a lot of people and they continue to do so, I can't turn my back on that.

    2. Lol cristobel well said "when the McCanns are finally cleared" 13.33 anon I thought they told us the Portuguese had cleared them when the case was archived........or was that another of mouthpiece Mitchell's lies

  11. Ros you say "I am attractive, confident and articulate"

    How does that fit in with your twitter answer to bennnett when he answered your point about payments to Carter Ruck and asked questions of you?

    "Cristobell Author ‏@RosalindaHu 54 mins54 minutes ago

    @zampos @SoniaPoulton Still think you snivelling coward and as to rest, #mccann


  12. If Mr. Angry of Harlow and his merry little band of witches think I'm going to hand over my personal information for their collective delectation online, they are (hilariously) off their trollies.

  13. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 June 2015 at 17:47

    He responded to your question - but you stamp your foot and do not answer his?

    What have you got to hide?

  14. He is asking me questions that are none of his business, same goes for his creepy friends. They believe they have the god given right to pry into the lives of others, I'm not assisting them.

  15. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 June 2015 at 18:51

    But you and Sonia questioned whether his payments to CR were genuine - wasn't that prying into the lives of others? He answered and provided evidence.

    His question to you which remains unanswered was " Were you paid for your interview by the Sun, if so, how much?"

    Is it so difficult to answer?

    1. LOL, it tickles me that that bugs you so much, crack on.

      Tony claims he pays Carter Ruck, some think he is a double agent, I merely think he's bonkers. He chose to put his bank stuff online, the choice was his. I choose not to and there is not an aggressive, stalking poster or law in the land that that will force me to, or quick version, kiss my ass.

  16. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 June 2015 at 19:14

    I have no intention of going anywhere close to you ass.

    Your refusal to answer a simple question (not asked by me by the way) and your denigration of his reply speaks volumes.

  17. Tony Bennett's sick 'Song for Christmas' - December 2007

    Tells you all you need to know about the sad clown.

    Whoever writes sick bile like that, deserves everything coming to them.

  18. "Were you paid for your interview by the Sun, if so, how much?"

    Don't forget - your answer can be checked and verified.

  19. 20:29
    Why are you so interested in whether she was paid or not?

    If she was, it can't be anywhere near what the McCann's have raked in over the years!

    1. Just a simple Yes or No would do. She shouldn't even divulge the amount.

  20. I'm not tell you anything, and bored with these 'are we there yet's' and 'just yes or no' demands, you are getting naff all and others will go in the bin.

  21. You and Bennett as pensioners should be ashamed of yourselves.
    Leave it to the authorities to solve this case.

    1. Are you a nodding dog?

      the authorities will not solve the case unless prompted by MSM or political pressure..

      Amaral was given his marching orders the moment he got too close to the truth.

      Scotland Yard spent 10 million (of UK taxpayers money) on getting sun tans and playing golf - and finding the odd sock.

      It's as plain and simple as this: either an alive or deceased Madeleine is found or the someone within the merry band of Tapasniks squeals.

      It's gonna be the latter not the former.

      My money's on Dianne Webster

      She's the only one not involved in the 'we were all so into another' loop

    2. The "authorities" haven't got a clue or they'd have solved the case by now. In the meantime there is no harm in discussing the case, you never know it could lead to the suspects getting caught!! There's plenty of information on the internet, filtering through daily, like Jerry said it only takes one key piece of information! There's lots of clever people doing their own research, which could lead to the abductor's.

    3. agreed @ 0132

      what's the disservice to Madeleine McCann?

      Is it, reading the files, discussing the case, cross referencing all those conflicting statements?

      OR is it trusting the 'authorities' to do their job for once, accepting, sheep like - the D-Notice, gagging the media?

      I'm with John Stalker (former Deputy Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police)

      'One thing above all worries me: Why have the McCanns and the seven other members of their group - the Tapas Nine - remained so silent? My gut instinct is that some big secret is probably being covered up.'

      The big secret will be revealed - Nixon and Blatter and Al Capone never thought they'd be caught out either - it's hubris that gets the feckers everytime.

      It might take an awful long time - but hey, we've all got youth and good looks on our side.

    4. 01:32. EVERY high profile case will be discussed by the public and has been since the beginning of newsprint. The more salacious cases get the front and centre pages - supply and demand, we want to read about them and discuss them, and tut tut about them later.

      The McCann case had all the ingredients for a blockbuster. A tragic baby, camera loving protagonists and fame seekers and of course wealth and high society, it was destined to run and run.

      Kate and Gerry have played the starring role in this ongoing soap opera with relish and enthusiasm, even going so far as paying newshounds £500k to keep them on the front page for a year. And of course all that talking leads to libel, leads to massive cash awards, etc, - everyone's a winner.

      I don't think I, or anyone else should have any qualms about discussing this case, because we are pretty much doing what they want us to. They prod us, we react. I would even go so far as to say Gerry is loving it, he keeps giving his true feelings away with those little duping delight grins (see blog Duping Delight), they are beyond his control, though when he is feeling super smug, I half think they are intentional. He wants us to know that he is laughing at us. Anyone with an annoying brother will know what I am talking about.

      Kate however, is the nervous nelly, the strain is visible on her face. And it is not the loss of her daughter that is terrifying her, it is the fear of being found out. Kate was far more relaxed in the summer of 2007 as the albums of happy snaps show, her face was clear and quick to smile and laugh. At that time she had the full undivided attention of her husband and they were becoming the family she had always dreamed of. Suddenly the stress and daily grind of caring for 3 demanding toddlers was over, Kate was surrounded by helping hands and Gerry's attention was back where she wanted, totally on herself.

      The sinister adage 'Be Careful What You Wish For [you might just get it]' has struck Kate and indeed Gerry, in ways they never could have imagined, they got the investigation re-opened, the example made of Brenda Leyland and are still waiting for their greatest wish of all, the discovery of Madeleine. No wonder they look so worried.

  22. My partner is a very stoic person - not given to emoting overly.

    We watched the Channel 4 programme 'Madeleine was here' together

    I asked my partner two questions afterwards:

    What do you make of Kate? - answer: 'the woman is terrified'

    What do you make of Gerry? - answer: 'one cold fish'

    Not scientific - but then again this isn't the Harvard Review - but common sense applied once, is worth ten dissertations..

    1. @ Anonymous5 June 2015 at 10:03

      Wow what an exemplary post - having followed the case for 8 years, reading all the newspaper articles, the files, all the blogs and forums I am stunned and ashamed.

      I have always supported the Mccanns in view of the fact that they have never been charged, brought to court and found guilty.

      However I have now changed my view - your partner has convinced me - "the woman is terrified" and Gerry is "one cold fish" has opened my eyes. What an astute person your partner is.

      I am now a fully fledged Mccann hater - I am convinced that out of the hundreds of thousands of comments I have read - your partner has hit the nail on the head.

      It is a pity that your stoic partner could not be bothered to comment and left it up to you - but hell that is not a complaint. It is a pity that your partner did not elucidate on the reasons for drawing the conclusions - but hey it is not important because I checked the views with the hairdressers daughter and she, whilst not agreeing, did not exactly not agree.

      My life has changed - thankyou Anonymous 5 June 2015 at 10:03 for your very important and pertinent input to the debate about what happened to Madeleine.

      "One cold fish" - nails it for me - book him Danno.

    2. Ros you say "I am attractive, confident and articulate"

      from your tweets today:

      " You are a gnat. Squish"

      "I have FOS to tell you to f*ck off"

      Your debating skill is seriously lacking.

      As to any pretence of class.... well!

    3. My dear old mad, but utterly brilliant, mother taught me that there are some people in this world to whom reason, logic and diplomacy will never mean a thing. The only words they understand, words that will register in their tiny minds are: 'fuck off'. Sadly, tigger, aquila, ayoyo, plebgate, Bennett, (a given) ladyinred etc. are among those people, and I am sure I will encounter others along the way.

      Not one of them are able to keep a civil tongue in their heads and they have zero speaking and listening skills. I'm not wasting my precious time on them.

      And btw, don't blame me, blame the education system that produced them.

    4. I have always found Tigger to be polite, intelligent and well informed. Just saying :)

  23. Actually 18:20, sarcasm doesn't make entertaining reading. It lacks wit, intelligence and creativity, it's possibly the lowest form of humour, if indeed you can attach the word humour to it.

    But, if you are proud of your above post, go you. You clearly haven't got much to work with.

    1. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 June 2015 at 18:32

      I have Gerry is "One cold fish" to work with. That is enough for me - prove me wrong.

      Oh I forgot - you don't like providing evidence do you?

    2. @ Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton5 June 2015 at 18:32

      I know you are here for entertainment - I am not.

    3. - 1923

      So this is a job for you?

      Excusing the child neglect of Gerry and Kate?

      Be proud

    4. 23:07 What worthy cause are you here for? If your reasons for being here are so much more noble than my own, why not use your own name?

      As for entertainment, if studying subjects that interest me is classed as entertainment, then guilty as charged.

    5. Same here!! The confusion was there from the very beginning, It was put into place for the sole purpose.. to detract from what was really happening on that FAMILY holiday. Any similar case would attract the same attention. The more confusing, and unbelievable this case became, the more intriguing! Now many people are looking for the truth, as we're/or most of us want justice for Madeleine, and want to find out what really happened to her on that so-called holiday.

      Thank you for your reply at 01:32 Cristobell.

  24. In the Guardian today:

    'A father at the centre of Britain’s first known case of paternity fraud involving IVF has called for the introduction of routine DNA testing in divorce after he was tricked into raising another man’s child as his own for six years.'

  25. apols. IVF fraud story in the Telegraph

  26. read the telegraph piece

    He vividly described his experience as like that being the parent of an abduction victim – having to grieve the loss of a child knowing that the child is still alive.