Saturday 8 August 2015


I believe the Smithman sighting is the biggest lead Scotland Yard have - they dedicated almost an entire 'Crimewatch' to it.  That picture of Gerry and Kate being interviewed by DCI Redwood with Smithman in the background is iconic for good reason.  And of course last summer, Operation Grange spent thousands if not millions, digging up areas in the immediate vicinity of Apartment 5A, following the route taken by Smithman.  You can kind of see why anyone desperate to take Smithman out of the equation would now be extremely agitated. 

CMoMM as many of us kind of saw coming, has finally self combusted.  History has shown that people don't like it, when you force one opinion down to their throats and exclude all others.  Of course you always get wannabe dictators and tyrants who think they can buck the trend, but it always ends in tears.  Tony might do well to put down his bible, and study ACTUAL history.  'Veni, Vide, Vice' ended with 'et tu Brute'. 

Contrary to the volumes of speculation and downright nonsense published by Tony Bennett, Gerry and Kate have deliberately played down and tried to ignore the sighting by the Smith family on the night of 3rd May.  Of the two 'sightings' on the night, they publicised the single sighting by Jane Tanner, rather than the group sighting by the Smith family.  Although the McCanns have held many press and faux police conferences dedicated to the Tanner sighting and Posh Spice look alike in Barcelona, they have NEVER made any appeals regarding the man seen by the Smiths.  For anyone studying this case, that is a huge red light!  In fact, so vague has been Team McCanns coverage of the Smithman sighting, that DCI Redwood introduced it as a huge revelation. 

When the Times newspaper published an article claiming that the McCanns suppressed information about 'Smithman', there were further legal challenges and machinations, but essentially The Times were right, and the McCanns' claim that they could not afford to publicise TWO suspects was clearly nonsense.  For 8 years Gerry and Kate have been able to get front page coverage for their every bodily function.  Kate couldn't make love to Gerry, they have been heartened, devastated and on many occasions apoplectic with rage, but they have never had a moment to mention the strongest possible lead to the recovery of their daughter?  Seriously?

The reasons CMoMM are now solely dedicated to establishing that Smithman was NOT Gerry are a mystery, but their tactics are not working.  Absolutely no-one outside their inner clique is buying it - not that it matters one iota.  Tony Bennett fortunately has not now and has never ever, had any influence over the investigation into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann.  My sympathy is entirely with those on the receiving end of his voluminous letters.  Ditto those on receiving end of letters etc from Team McCann.  Wealth can buy a lot of 'legalspeak' and tie people up in paperwork for years.  Lets hope none of the officers on Operation Grange have been assigned to it. 

I have no idea what is going with on Operation Grange, other than an extraordinary, nay, unique investigation, the like of which the entire world has probably never seen before.  30+ top homicide detectives, millions of pounds of public money, 4 YEARS and counting - in search of one small girl. I am not saying one small girl does not deserve such attention, but on a bizarre and disproportionate level, it goes off the scale. 

However, I am in fact heartened, if I may borrow the word, that Scotland Yard appear to be working on behalf of Madeleine, though for obvious reasons, they cannot say so.  Their generous contribution to their fellow officer's legal battles with the former suspects, spoke volumes.  I don't discard the words of others who comment on the McCann case, this case has been astonishing on every level.  I would argue that cover ups would be quiet and discreet, which is why we do not know about them. But then again, 'in plain sight' appears to be the current trend, so who knows. 

When you discard the elephants, the lion tamers, the flying trapeze and the clowns, there was a tragedy.  A tragedy lost in the obscene rush to profit and capitalise in the aftermath.  Madeleine wasn't mourned, she was turned into a trademark.  Her cute, angelic face covered a thousand billboards, but we never knew who she was.  She didn't grow up, she never will.  As Gerry says she is the innocent victim in all this.

'Gerry and I are finishers' Kate once said, and indeed they are.  They have proved it time and time again with their sporting achievements.  Whilst the rest of us start each new year with a list of wholesome resolutions, by January 3rd, we are diving head first into a tub of Hagaan Das and singing 'Little Ole Wine Drinker Me' hicGerry and Kate are made of much sterner stuff, they probably have a list of  'objectives' (carved in stone) rather than drunken aspirations to climb Mount Everest, legalise fun drugs and bring back Flower Power.  Gerry and Kate get things done, they are ruled by their heads, not their hearts, and that combined with an almost martyresque determination, drives them on.  They will not give up, they will not abandon their mission. #imthekingoftheword #drevil #kamakikaze #doyourecant #ouchthatburns

Kate may well come to regret those ill chosen words, Goncalo Amaral too is a finisher, and his is a noble and just cause.  He will settle for nothing less than the truth.  Goncalo, if he will forgive me, is the tortoise to the McCanns' hare, 'don't brag about your lightening pace, Slow and Steady won the race'. (Aesop)

From Only in America blog.


  1. They played down the Smithman sighting for as long as possible and the e-fits WERE withheld from the public for five years, that is indisputable. Their excuse, that it would have been too expensive to publicise them is not credible as all they had to do was pass the e-fits to any media outlet and they'd have gone global in a matter of minutes at no cost to the fund. They also failed to publicise the e-fits in the 2009 documentary, "Madeleine Was Here", and again in 2011, in Kate McCann's book, "madeleine". These were two major opportunities not to be missed and, in both instances, though Smithman was given an airing, they deliberately withheld the e-fits from the public even though they claimed Tannerman was the abductor, and further claimed that Smithman and Tannerman were the same person. If they'd really believed the two sightings were of the same person why withhold those e-fits? Why didn't they give faceless Tannerman a Smithman face?

  2. "However, I am in fact heartened, if I may borrow the word, that Scotland Yard appear to be working on behalf of Madeleine, though for obvious reasons, they cannot say so. Their generous contribution to their fellow officer's legal battles with the former suspects, spoke volumes."

    Would you care to explain what you mean by that?

    1. Is it really so ambiguous?

      A group of anonymous Metropolitan police made a generous donation of £1,000 to assist a fellow officer. I would imagine that police officers, just like doctors, have an unwritten code whereby they 'stand together'.

      The McCanns (former suspects) have financially ruined the Detective who was originally assigned to investigate the case of their missing daughter. For the officers of Operation Grange, any one of them could be next, bye, bye career and pension.

      That is not a good precedent to have in any country, it could essentially prevent police from fully investigating crimes of a sensitive nature, especially if the 'suspects' have establishment connections.

      I doubt very much any policeman in any police force would champion the rights of former suspects to persecute and financially ruin their investigators. The police are human beings and every human being comes with a set of morals, values and even prejudices. The case of McCanns .v. Goncalo Amaral is obscene on every level, most particularly, it is a slap in the face to police the world over.

      Try going along to see your GP and telling him/her, I have just made mincemeat of one of your colleagues for not treating me properly, so you better make me your favourite patient' and see where that gets you.

    2. @ Ros 9 August 2015 at 09:33

      Thankyou for your considered reply - you are wrong on so many counts it is hard to think of where to start.

      Amaral was not a Detective when the Mccanns started action against him - he was a retired detective who then became an author and morning TV sofa personality making shed loads of money on the back of being the co-ordinator into the failed investigation of the missing Madeleine case. I would ask you - what evidence do you have that Amaral was financially sound before the Mccann court case?

      You refer to officers of Operation Grange losing their careers and pension. Well yeas they may well do if they decide to write a book accusing someone of something for which they have no evidence. Reminder - Amaral was not a serving officer when he wrote his book so your comparison is false.

      The case of McCanns .v. Goncalo Amaral is not obscene it is a valid case that has gone through the courts in Portugal.

      If I went to my GP and told him or her that a previous GP had written a book and appeared on TV accusing me of doing something that I didn't do - without evidence - and I made mincemeat of him/her in a court of law - then consider this Ros - would he or she accept the decision of the court, or prefer online loonies spending their lives stamping and shouting that it is not fair?

      Finally - you were duped by Bennett for years (oh and went for a drink with him after he wrote a review of your book) - you are still being duped by online nutters - what evidence do you have that an anonymous group of Metropolitan police made a generous donation of £1,000 to Amaral?

      Have you noticed that the lovey Leanne changed her twitter account and no longer posts about her scam fund?

      Do some proper research and stop posting crap erroneous blogs.

      As a footnote I will add that I am not a member of JATYK or any other forum.

    3. Goncalo Amaral was not a serving police officer when the McCanns sued him, because the evil machinations of the parents cost him his job! You are really not making them look any better or more likeable.

      I agree I was duped by Bennett, but not for as long you imagine. One meeting with him was more than enough, lol.

      I am curious as to the online nutters who are duping me, do tell, lol. I'm not affiliated to anyone, never have been. I am a lone wolf(ess) and have been throughout the duration of this case, which is of course why none of you creeps have a single thing to throw at me, ha ha.

      As to the evidence that the Met police donated to Goncalo's Fund - well it is there in black and white on the Go Fund Me page, one thousand smackeroos hard cash for a fellow officer who is being persecuted by former suspects.

      However, the most startling accusation you make against Goncalo is the notion that he wrote a book and went on to become a television personality on the breakfast sofas! Are you for real? lol, that's exactly what the McCanns did!

  3. O lecturer in English, mistress of prose, it's Veni Vidi vici. Remember, for the hard of spelling... Google is your friend.

    1. Many thanks for pointing that out at 5.08 on a Sunday morning. I am indeed blessed that JATKY2 play such close attention to my typos and grammatical errors, a whole thread for this one! I am hoping in time, one of you, or perhaps even the group combined might be able to cobble something together to challenge the content of my blogs? Do please keep trying, but I won't hold my breath.

    2. It would be nice if certain people analysed the McCanns' dodgy behaviour and statements with such diligence!

    3. Indeed Harry, their priorities are somewhat skewhiff! (sp) lol

  4. Ros there are a number of errors in your article. You have added a comma in the wrong place for one. You should proof read and edit as necessary.

    On the subject of Tony Bennett, he is not my favourite person either, far from it. I find him an obnoxious git who puts his nose into others business and causes mayhem as he goes along, however, you are not squeaky clean on that score and I abhor your work at trying to drag the McCann family down and down. It is akin to kicking a man when he is down and a cowardly act.

    You seem to be a sister in arms with Lizzy HiDeHo Taylor in as much as you have an over inflated ego when you look at your own work. Your blogs are just that. Nothing to write home about!

  5. Apologies 11:31, but I was taught punctuation and grammar by an angry religious zealot wielding a ruler - I'm afraid the trauma remains, lol.

    Your accusation that I am trying to drag the McCann family down is quite bizarre, it suggests all sorts. I can't bring them down (down from where?) - bring them down, like EVERY other aspect of their lives is in their control, and their control only.

    I will admit that I am possibly putting a spoke in their fundraising wheel, and I hope that is the case. There are so many worthy causes out there who desperately need help, it breaks my heart to see so much money being misappropriated. And in my opinion, using peoples' kind donations to protect your image is misappropriation and takes vanity off the scale.

    As for my work? What can I say. I write as I speak, and I am a chatterbox, a label given to me at the age of 4, and one that has stuck! The beauty of language is that it develops and evolves 11:31, and most writers have their own unique style, I'm afraid mine is beyond my control, so you can imagine the problems I had writing academic essays, lol.

    I eschew rules and regulations my friend, just as an artist is free to use all and any materials at their disposal to create their vision, so too am I and indeed, anyone at all who dreams of 'writing'. First rule of writing - there are no rules!

    As selfish as this may sound, I write for my own pleasure, for me it is a release for all the thoughts that constantly torment, tantalise and amuse me. I like to shock people and I like to make them laugh. I will continue writing if I have only one reader left and as long as my arthritic old fingers can :). I will also encourage others to write away exactly as they wish, and to ignore pedantic grammar police such as yourself!

    1. Ros 9 August 2015 at 14:21

      " I like to shock people and I like to make them laugh."

      Nothing you have ever written has made me laugh.

  6. Of that I am indeed convinced 18:51, I imagine laughter is very rare for you. So sad.

  7. I have to say i agree with a comment made by 18 46 about the Met Police,just because a donation was made in there name does'nt mean that it has come from them.Someone could make a donation from "Simon Cowell" but it does'nt mean it is thee Simon Cowell.

    I cant see the Met Police making a donation,but if they did that is fantastic.

  8. The donation could have come from a prankster I suppose, but £1,000 is rather a lot of cash for a prank that can never, ever be publicly acknowledged.

    Unfortunately for Kate and Gerry, their behaviour and attitude towards the police is very well documented. If you think police forces the world over find them warm, cuddly and sympathetic, you are probably way off course. They are a demanding (wannabe) power couple who are happy to destroy any 'underling' (and they consider police officers underlings) who stand in their way. They have an over inflated sense of their own importance, investigators to them are Tweedledum and Tweedledee, especially the ones who do not obey Team McCann orders. I imagine when the hat for their Portuguese colleague went around, they all dipped in their pockets and said 'hell yeh'.

  9. "They have an over inflated sense of their own importance, investigators to them are Tweedledum and Tweedledee,"

    Don't forget "fu.cking tossers" also.

    They're grand words to use about dedicated police officers who you desperately need to find your "abducted" child I think.