Sunday, 1 January 2017


Happy new year to all my readers old and new, thank you for sticking with me, and thank you for returning again and again.  Just to pee my enemies off, I am absolutely chuffed with the way my blog has developed.  It has survived all the pettiness and squabbles that caused most of the other groups and forums to self combust.  I've never been in the slightest bit bothered about trolls, troublemakers and disrupters, and I am happy to publish alternate opinions as long as they are not littered with abuse and insults. 

As should be clear, I cannot and will not be censored, and I don't want to censor anyone else.  This hasn't led to anarchy or a need for a panic room, the opposite in fact, this is one of the few places in the niche Madeleine world where alternate theories and opinions are welcome.  I'm desperate to know what others think, which is why my blog is interactive.  Far from being upset when I am proved wrong, I am grateful to be enlightened.  One of my favourite, and oft used phrases is 'you know, I never thought about it like that before'. 

The part of me that wants to believe in the good of human nature, would like to be proved wrong in the Madeleine case.  The last few remnants of Catholic would like the burden taken away, It would be nice to go back prior to that summer of 2007, when the world appeared to be more stable and Western governments less corrupt.  This case is so much more than a little girl who went missing, and hopefully one day, all those who used her name and face so unscrupulously will be held to account.

Meanwhile, I have been trying to put off 2017, hiding under the duvet won't make it go away.  I am not so much concerned about Brexit, I actually wanted to stay until I saw how much it mean't to ace turncoat Owen Smith, now I think Out is right.  Much, much, worse, is that that the USA have, incredibly, elected a raving lunatic as  their next President.  It's kinda like the UK voting in Benny Hill. A slobbering letch with bad hair chasing scantily clad lingerie models. 

And it's not just that Donald Trump has been elected the next US President, it is the fact that his 'greed is good' philosophy is spreading like a plague throughout the world as we are seeing a rise of the far Right not seen since the 1930's.  Centre politics won't defeat them because they have more in common with them than the Left.  When given the choice, Mr. 'Centre' himself, Nick Clegg, chose hard right tories over wishy washy Blairites. 

Anyway, enough of the soapbox, my warmest wishes to all my readers and thank you so much for your interesting and insightful contributions.  I am always grateful to anyone who takes the time and trouble to comment, the interesting points you raise gives me much to discuss, many thanks.

Happy New Year!   


  1. Hi tony - is that you?

  2. Alternatively you can have a nice New Year message from a leading light on bennett cesspit - a well respected poster and apparently a statement analyser. When analyse this:

    " Re: Another bogus Charity story

    Post by Hobs Today at 1:28
    I have noticed that when it comes to these charities for water, for children etc, it is always a white person making the appeal and when they include segments on donors such as someone sponsoring a child, it is always a white person.

    Why do they never show blacks,asians, muslims making the appeals or saying they sponsor a child?

    Is it because they know that whites will hand over their money without question?

    Do they not use other races or nationalities or religions because they know money isn't going to be forthcoming?

    I ignore all the charity appeals and should a chugger collar me i will ask how much they are getting paid?
    How much their CEO is getting paid?
    How much money goes on salaries, expenses, rent etc before a penny is spent on actual charity work.

    I asked a chugger for wateraid what they plan to do when all the water table has been drained dry and not replenished due to drought.
    How the people etc are supposed to have access to clean water then?

    Why so little is done to teach people not to pollute their water supply, not to crap in the ir drinking water.

    I ask why they mention some poor child having to walk umpteen miles a day to get water when they could simply move nearer the water supply.

    Why after decades of money coming in they have still not solved the problems they are begging donations for to supposedly help said cause.

    I am mean like that, asking awkward questions. :)

    Happy new year one and all xx"


    1. There is a mean spirited pettiness that floats over the cesspit like steam over a pile of dung. In a previous life they probably had front row seats at the stonings, tarring and featherings and public executions. Abandon compassion and hope all ye who enter CMoMM.

      It is not really surprising that this small clique of anonymous malcontents are still hanging out together all these years later. I would imagine in the real world, their miserable, anti social personalities are a complete a turn off to 'regular' people.

      Prior to Hob's Ebenezer like rant, Jill put a list of celebrities who died in 2016. Naturally, it is split in two. Those who did drugs and partied and thus deserved their early demise, and those who didn't.

      It pains me to see the sanctimonious way in which they tear at the troubled soul of the artist, as if everyone should be exactly like them. Miserable and bloody minded. As Bill Hicks (who died at 33) said, they should go home and throw out all their books, videos and CDs, because most were created on drugs and alcohol. As Wordsworth said to Coleridge, 'pass the opium dude'.

      Bizarrely, however, I agree with regard to many of these so called charities. Even as far back as my own childhood, major charities have pushed to get water to remote villages in Africa.

      My question would be why, after 50 plus years of collecting billions and in the 21st century, there are still small children traipsing miles for dirty water. What has happened to all the money that has gone before?

      However, I don't blame those in desperate need, I blame a system that eats up the donations before they reach their intended destination. Among (many) other things, the Madeleine McCann case has exposed just how bogus many leading charities are.

      Missing People for example, has spent how many donations advertising the most famous missing child on the planet, who isn't in fact missing. What of genuinely missing kids, who with one fraction of the publicity Madeleine has had, could have been found?

      No doubt the cesspit will continue to appal us with their racist, sexist and homophobic views, whilst we nod, smile and think 'yeh, I can see why your clinging onto the anonymity' lol.

      For those who read and contribute here, party on dudes! Happy New Year! x

    2. I think that a get-together of active CMoMM members could be held in a telephone kiosk! Okay, make it two kiosks.

      New year greetings to Cristobell and everyone who contributes here.

    3. A kiosk full of spindly fingers and the jangling chains of the ghosts of Christmas past Tina, lol.

      I saw the New Year in with Rodrigo, Cesare and Lucretzia Borgia, the blood and mayhem of the 15th century seemed preferable to the reality of what next year might bring, gawd 'elp us.

      Ah well, the hoover remains abandoned in the hall, I'm badly in need of a big old dose of Ice Age (1-4), Despicable Me, or anything with dogs in, and snow, and a happy ending! Happy New Year Tina x

    4. Actually to use statement analysis on Ms Hobs, her penultimate sentence should have had a full stop after 'I am mean like that', the rest of the sentence is superfluous.

  3. First off, a very happy new year to you Ros :) x

    So, another year ahead on the spinning ball of madness. Strap yourself in, there's nutters at the wheel...

    I hope this blog continues as it's gone so far. I hope it progresses too. Other blogs /sites/social networks don't matter . They're there ; this is here. Let them eat each other .
    I'd like to think the whole Madeleine mystery will be put to bed this year. Alas, I fear there's more chance of finding a rocking horse on the moon. Ten years of theorising, arguing, debating, sifting, scrutinising , accusations, libel cases and stonewalling tell me that this is to be filed in the Lord Lucan cabinet.
    I'm a cynic ( for those who hadn't noticed the subtle traces). But, at heart, I'm an idealist. But we don't think with our hearts. We could try, but then we'd crash eventually.And the unpractised mind wouldn't be able to put Humpty together again . Life, and the ways of the world, has made me what I am. If i could advise anyone in any way it would simply be two words - ''question everything''. We're served, on a daily basis , plates of bad food. We don't have to eat it. leave it, there's plenty of others willing to keep eating it unfortunately. I've found, in the last 7 or so years, that everything is smoke and mirrors. Everything. I've been through so much research -good, bad, and crazy, I sometimes see double. But I can see much more clearly now. It was a little like the film 'They Live' ( John Carpenter, possibly still on youtube ). I sort of 'evolved' my own personal sunglasses and it was horrible. But I wouldn't be without them...

    Don't worry about Brexit, Ros. And don't worry about Left and Right. We only go through the superficial motions of a democracy on polling day. It doesn't matter what colour the bus is, it's still aiming to mow us down. And as for Trump, so he's a nutcase. It's an American tradition to elect those. Kennedy and Lincoln were the only sane presidents but they got caught. Trump is setting up The Whitehouse as a branch of Wall Street.He's already picking his staff from there. The same way our bank places the likes of Cameron, Thatcher, Osborne et al in place. The ultimate aim is a Plutocracy. The immediate aim is 1933. A halfwit chancellor here, a celebrity bankrupt over there. The string -pullers have infiltrated in every major place. It can't end well if they stay in them. Putin - your move sir..

    1. Many thanks Ziggy. Tis people like your goodself who have kept the discussions up to date and lively!

      The colour of the bus analogy is somewhat cynical, but, and I hate to admit it, it holds more than a little truth. I fear Trump more than most though Ziggy, Dubya did at least have some awareness that he was an imbecile, Trump has none. He believes he is omnipotent, and history has been down that road many times before. It always ends in catastrophe.

      I will try to take your kind advice Ziggy, and put it out of my head for a wee while at least. There are still a lot of good guys in the world.

      I had to look up plutocracy, and I have to say I think we are already there and heading towards an autocracy with Trump as new Emperor and God.

      Many years ago my lads and I were huge fans of the Highlander films and TV series. A 'Highlander' could flit through any time or place in history, but not when there was another Highlander present. Stay with me, there is a point, lol. The battle cry as each Highlander faced the other was 'there can be only one', usually just before decapitating their opponent, the only way to kill a Highlander. I once caught older son with younger son in a headlock whilst little screamed 'get off me, I'm not a Highlander'.

      I always think of that 'there can be only one' metaphor when looking at the large corporations and the super rich. The time will come when they start fighting each other, that's if it hasn't already.

      Trump has the edge over the media moguls, while their empires crumble as newspapers become obsolete, Trump's fortune is based on property development. As US President he can build anything he wants anywhere. When he talks about making America great, he really means making himself great. I fear that in 5 years time almost everything will carry the brand name Trump. It is as if we are watching the nightmare world of Aldous Huxley, where the King of capitalism, Our Ford, is worshipped as a God.

      But, tis still the season of good cheer! So I'm off to snuggle up with 1001 dalmations and a mince pie! Happy New Year Ziggy! x

  4. Day one, 2017, midday - first thread begins positively, then quickly turns into CMoMM commercial. Any good reason ?Nothing gets responses or prompts discussion half as much as the so-called cesspit. If you keep catching the ball, they'll keep throwing it.If you go looking for the ball then there's no reason for complaining. We didn't even have schoolyard disputes like this after the age of 9 . Do they have to be published ?

    Charities, yeah-a con 80% of the time. Cancer's the biggest and that's in our own back yard. It doesn't discriminate etc ( it just has a bias when it comes to the elite of the planet and that's a coincidence, as the shares a lot of them have in pharmaceutical outfits). The overseas in need scam runs deeper. But it's not about that here is it..

    What I'm going to post seems a bit off topic ( child abduction) but i think it's related to the subject of interpretation of what the public can perceive as 'evidence' .It also concerns the reliability of fringe investigative tools ( body language, polygraphs, voice analysis).
    The Crime and Investigation channel has some good documentaries now and then. One is Disappeared. I watched a couple this morning. One was the case of Jessica Lunsford, which led to the introduction in most states of 'Jessica's Law' . What was interesting was the immediate suspicion of her family, including her grandparents.Both failed polygraphs, as did the dad. Voice analysis didn't come out well for them either, nor did the 'reading' of their behaviour. They eventually found that 200 yards away their lived an ex con ( paedophile) who had removed his tag.he'd gone on the run too. They got him eventually.the rest is history.

    The other one i watched was about a little Asian boy, Trenton Duckett, 2006 . It looked like he'd been abducted from his bed in the middle of the night. Hysterical phone calls were made by the unstable mother. Police were all over the town, media and so on. The first subject was the estranged husband. There had been a 2 year ongoing bitter custody battle that he wasn't winning. A slam dunk as they say ? Worse for him was the emails he'd sent her. They were nasty and they threatened her and the child with death if he didn't get his way. On camera he came across as a bit of a 'bumpkin' but a likeable and honest one who didn't have such thoughts at all. He would though wouldn't he.She came a cross as going out of her mind with panic and worry. She led searches with the public etc. Then it was found the emails were traced to guess where - her home. Suddenly she became all folded arms and defiant. She moved to her parents house. The shot herself.
    She left 3 suicide notes in all. The police had lost their only lead.Did she tell where he was ? Or alive ? No. But her widowed husband is hoping that 'when he grows up' hints in the m notes suggest that she was saying he isn't dead. Maybe. Or maybe she was writing a last lie to go out with a clean conscience ? That's something to ponder. Maybe Mr Hyatt could solve it. Nobody has yet..

    1. Melinda stated she put her son to bed at approximately 7:00 pm. In a blue and green striped shirt and denim shorts?

  5. Missing charity is particularly scandalous as it allowed Kate McCann, a mother who 'lost' her child in the most suspicious circumstances imaginable, to become an ambassador. How could this have been allowed? Are the people involved really so thick as to think that Madeleine was abducted by the big bad bogey-man? Or is there a far darker agenda going on?

    What is noteworthy is that the TM heads seem to be firmly under the parapet. Quite right too. I feel sorry for all their children who have to live with parents who are notorious for all the wrong reasons.

    That group of predominantly doctors have a very nasty secret to hide in my opinion. Very nasty indeed. Easier to cling to the illusion of the big bad bogey-man than to admit that some adults - yes even parents and even doctors - can harm children.

    I have a friend who was subject to abuse from both her parents and thankfully ended up living with her grandparents who were kind for most of her childhood. She felt that there is enormous resistance from a lot of people to acknowledge that mothers can be abusive as well as fathers. People do not want to hear it as the caring mother figure is so iconic. When the 'caring' mother or indeed the 'doting' father is also white, middle-class. a professional working in the caring professions such as a doctor, there is even greater resistance to believe such a person could harm children. Perhaps even deliberately or out of malice.

    While we do not know exactly what happened that week it is on record that Detective Amaral thinks Madeleine died prior to the alarm being raised about her being missing on Thursday evening. Despite what TM claim, I have not see a jot of evidence that points away from Dr Amaral's belief. Not one jot. And in fact I see much evidence that Madeleine did, indeed, die that week.

    So the questions still remain. When did she die? And how did she die? I do not believe it was an accident but I think it was passed off as an accident to those 'in the know' that it was not a genuine child abduction case. I imagine the grannies that were dispatched home on the 'Granny Express' were asking awkward questions that made Gerry lose his temper and get them out of the way.

    1. I don't think Missing People could resist the opportunity to use the cherubic little face of Madeleine to front their own fundraising l6:35. Most missing kids are spotty, belligerent adolescents with little appeal. The innocent, angelic little Madeleine was the perfect poster child.

      Abuse can come in many forms 16:35, as a child in the convent, I remember looking over at a 'normal' family in the right hand pews of the church. The stern upright father looked just as scary as the creeps who looked after us, and the kids looked twice as miserable.

      I tend to go along with the theory of Goncalo Amaral, including accident. I think when Gerry used the word 'disaster', he was being accurate.

      I do tend to agree with you on the 'Granny Express' though, older women have a tendency to ask awkward questions.

  6. Madeleine McCann died and became a poster child, an icon.

    "Madeleine does seem to have become iconic of missing children," Kate McCann told CNN on May 3, 2008

    As 16:35 says, the questions still remain. When did she die and how did she die?

    Questions by Gerry McCann:

    “If Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment – why would that be our fault?”

    “And if she died when we were in the apartment or fell and di.., why would we cover that up?”

  7. People have still not realised how smart and altruistic these people actually are in real life.

  8. @13.33 Some people have - take Clarence Mitchell for one...he's made so much he's been able to set up his own PR agency. Not bad for a 'politician'.

  9. General warning about keeping your computer safe online - NEVER click or open a link posted by an anonymous source to a site that you know nothing about!

  10. Paranoid Mccann hatred on the cesspit:

    " Fund accounts 2016 - Late again!!!

    Post by sharonl Today at 20:32
    The statutory accounts were due to be filed at Companies House on Dec 31st

    They are late again.

    That means another penalty of £150 for Madeleines' diminishing fund (that is assuming that our corrupt government hasn't exempted the McCanns from these penalties that every other company has to pay)"

    31/12 was Saturday - today 02/01/17 is a Bank holiday.

    Maybe sharon the shite wants Companies House staff to work overtime just to satisfy her obsession with hating anything Mccann related.

  11. Hi Ros, Happy New Year to you and all the other bloggers on this site. This is the only site I comment on as it is sensible and open to people's different viewpoints. With 2016 being a year of surprises Brexit, Trump I hope 2017 can match or surpass that.

    1. And your contributions are much appreciated John, Happy New Year to you!

      Of course my little blog only gets a tiny percentage of the 200,000 hits per day of CMoMM lol, but with its' measly 1,000 hits per day (approx), it has a wider audience and significantly more independent contributors, how strange.

      I suppose if I wanted to get 2 million hits a month like the cesspit, I could restrict the discussion to one party line and insult anyone who takes the trouble to write in. Clearly that is where I am going wrong.

      CMoMM it appears, goes viral on a daily basis, something, Kim Kardashian and Justin Bieber can only dream of. What is your secret Jill? I'm sure there are many A listers out there who could do with a few tips. Is it the towering wit and intellect of Tony Bennett? Or maybe it's the sneering antisocial behaviour of it's leading malcontents?

      With 2 million hits a month, the cesspit must be the most popular forum on the globe, yet they only appear to have half a dozen active members. For a forum that claims to be seeking the truth, that seems pretty incredible.

      Apologies for using your post John, but I did find Jill Havern's nutjob statistics funny.

      Take care John, and my kindest wishes for 2017, after the unbelievable year that has just gone, who knows what's in store!

  12. I'm surprised that she has forgotten that this happens every year; when the accounts are available for public viewing, the date stamp on them shows that they were received at the end of December.

    1. The definition of stupidity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. As you say Rhona, the cesspit's criticism of the McCann accounts is an annual event and they have the same result. Nothing, nada, zilch.

      Anyway, Happy New Year and kindest wishes to you Rhona.

    2. The lies of Jill Havern. Just been checking out the stats on the Home page of the cesspit. Apparently the most users they have ever had online is 2,583 in October 2013. Not sure how this correlates with the claimed 30,000 hits a day, 2 million per month, but it doesn't bode well for a 'truth' forum when the owner is telling such out and out whoppers.

  13. Questions by Gerry McCann:

    “If Madeleine had hurt herself inside the apartment – why would that be our fault?”

    “And if she died when we were in the apartment or fell and di.., why would we cover that up?”


    These are interesting questions and indeed answers from the father who considered his daughter's eye defect (which wasn't a coloboma) to be 'a good marketing ploy'. I think they tell us quite categorically that Madeleine did not 'hurt herself'. Reading between the lines, I think that means someone else 'hurt' her. It wouldn't necessarily be the fault of the parents if Madeleine 'hurt herself' (although not being there is pretty negligent) but of course it would be the fault of the parents if someone else did and they weren't there to protect her. Or, indeed, one of the parents or their friends 'hurt' her.

    I think it also tells us that she didn't die as the result of a fall, but for another reason.

    This is interesting, though: "If she died when we were in the apartment....why would we cover that up?"

    Well, one reason might be that Madeleine died while in the apartment at the hands of her parents and/or their friends...that would be a good reason to cover up her death.

    Combine the above with the 'clobbered' comments from Russell and other 'brain leaks' from TM and I think it is fairly self-evident what happened to Madeleine McCann.

    1. From the off Gerry and Kate were using defensive language, we didn't do anything wrong, we are responsible parents, why would that be our fault?

      The parents' need to protect themselves has always been the overriding message 10:00, I think that's probably what aroused most of our suspicion.

      Genuinely grieving parents always blame themselves and nothing anyone says can stop their self torment, it is usually heartbreaking to observers. They never, ever, say 'it's not my fault', because in their heads, they believe it is.

      Of course Gerry and Kate have their reasons for telling us over and over they did nothing wrong. Unfortunately for them, it is not endearing, in fact the opposite, it screams guilt.

    2. Anon @ 10.00 says : " I think it is fairly self-evident what happened to Madeleine McCann."

      In that case you will have no problem with telling us who did what to Madeleine and where and when?

  14. @10:00

    Unfortunately, Gerry McCann was making statements and posing rhetorical questions.They were prompted by the general climate of doubt that was growing publicly- the people who,on the whole, fell for the campaign and felt sympathy . That's also why, around the same time, one of the team thought it would be good to try an 'anti-troll' smokescreen ; Gerry calling, via Team Murdoch and Freud(Matthew) for an example to be made of them.The see-saw needed tilting back. Brenda Leyland seems to have been unfortunate timing( or fortunate depending on who you are).It didn't stem the flow of doubt either way.Without a death certificate or forensic evidence, Madeleine is still legally alive.Unfortunately reading 'between the lines' is difficult as it's all down to opinion.Between the lines, on paper, there is only space.It can be filled in any way by any one. Clearly, this is known, and it will keep anyone safe from prosecution. I'd like to say the team is a well oiled machine, but i don't think it is. It's been too clumsy, too arrogant, and too superior.It's a case of, look, you're all plebs, we're from high places - our script stands, live with it. That's why, after ten years, it hasn't moved an inch in reality and there's no solid reason for that to change.

    If this event was treated like any other of a child abduction ( police matter), it would have been concluded in months.Politicians removed the police, ergo, the chance of a deep investigation. In under ten years the McCanns have sat down with three British Prime Ministers over this. It's not just a crime.People in high places have 'found' vast sums of money to give to the McCanns and made strenuous efforts to keep real impartial, objective investigations being facilitated. They've fought harder than the McCanns.The McCanns are the spokesmen. If a murder or accidental death occured, there'd be no reason not to make arrests.They're not royalty.Even with no body i think arrests. charges and prosecutions would have taken place purely on the neglect on the night and the dubious 'sleep' of the twins. The child doesn't belong to the Government of Britain or Portugal but they're fighting as though she is. Politicians never fight like this over a crime that doesn't involve politicians.

    1. ZiggySawdust @12:06

      "Politicians never fight like this over a crime that doesn't involve politicians."

      Might be of interest:

      7 July 2013

      It is understood Wainwright has been personally involved in advising ministers on how best to co-operate with the Portuguese authorities, an issue which has previously bedevilled progress on the case.


      30 December 2016

    2. @ 13:35
      Interesting that isn't it...

      '' private warnings from senior police officers ''

      '' decision has been made despite behind the scenes ''

      '' irrational given Europol's role in the case of Madeleine McCann ''

      How's that for high status. Now the case is a pawn in a much bigger game. Where was all of this for Ben Needham ?
      Every time we read anything in this country in the past 5 years pointing to big chiefs in the met, it's about 'behind the scenes' and other expressions pointing towards the need to stay covert.And isn't it odd that it always seems to be about 'historical' cases of this or that which leave the mighty in a bad light.

      Those quotes reminded me of the famous ''there are dark forces at work'' from none other than Herr majesty regarding Diana's 'accident'( those dark forces can be dangerous when you're in a tunnel i suppose).At least she hasn't piped up yet, though Lord Of The Flies and old pal of Savile, Charlie did didn't he...

      This is not your bog standard murder, accident or abduction..

    3. Your post sent shivers down spine Ziggy, the last paragraph especially. Three British prime ministers and the governments of two nations and gawd knows how many senior British police officers, lying, cheating and conniving to cover up the death of a little girl.

      Actually, it ought to be 4 British prime ministers, because Theresa May, first as Home Secretary, then as PM, has been throwing millions of taxpayers money at this case for 5 years. Not to discover the truth, because that appears to be further away than it ever was, but to keep the myth of the abduction going.

      I sincerely hope the death of that child haunts the bleddy lot of them til their dying days.

    4. Ziggy - "Politicians never fight like this over a crime that doesn't involve politicians."

      Possibly true - but then politicians are all over this case. Right from the start. Some of the highest and most prominent in the land. No wonder May et al don't want those files made public. TM have made them look like a bunch of suckers who were hoodwinked into supporting a lost child campaign and who now are acutely embarrassed at
      jumped to the TM bidding. TM have done an amazing job - they even managed to get the Sun onside (imagine what the Fake Sheik could have unearthed on this case !?). What about Leveson - how did Gerry get away with that ? He PAID£500K to be kept on the front pages of newspapers and gets to make a sworn testimony about how his family has suffered from press intrusion? And no one said a word.

      For me govts have covered up their own involvement only to hid their embarrassment at supporting a scam that wasn't identified until SY told them otherwise. The day TM fled Portugal must have been a sobering moment for all involved. Who knows what the Sun/RB knows about this -what with all their criminal activities and bought contacts in the Met etc.

      I don't see any conspiracy (on the part of government , at last). Politicians wedded themselves to TM for altruistic reasons and possibly personal gain and you know that saying - marry in haste , repent at leisure.

  15. I agree, Ros

    ( 'alleged' death we have to say i suppose )

    Strange now you mention it, a bookie would have given huge odds two or three years ago on May being PM. She was the Home Secretary who 'found some money' ( Cameron's quote) in Home Office funds. Amazing how often the Tories can find money for anything but the NHS . Cameron was thinking about his second reign of terror then. So, how do you announce, in the middle of his second recession in reign one that you can fund things like this before our own national debt. You 'find' some you didn't realise was there all along.Yep, that's realistic . He saved face, became the hero, and May has her reward in her part in her latest cover up.We need an Edward Snowden to break ranks and find a hole to hide in and spill the lot. We thought Shrimpton was one. he might be.But I think one smack on the knuckles has brought him back in line.What happened to Christopher Story ? His leak was pretty explosive. Everyone shouted 'conspiracy nut' before they read it. By the time they had actually read it he was in the cemetery.

  16. Oh Christ - it seems like it is going to be another year of conspiracy theories and cover-ups without a shred of evidence.

    Still it keeps the forums and blogs running doesn't it!!!

    1. Indeed! ("Three British prime ministers and the governments of two nations and gawd knows how many senior British police officers, lying, cheating and conniving to cover up the death of a little girl.")


    2. Sometimes conspiracy theories become conspiracy facts.

    3. Is there a nice way of putting that Chez?

      A nice way of saying the British establishment assisted the McCanns in deceiving the public? How many contributed to the McCann Fund for example when head of CEOP Jim Gamble, appeared with the parents on breakfast TV promoting the abduction? Even though the Portuguese Judiciary had named them arguidos.

      What of the men in PDL rounded up by DCI Redwood and accused of stealing Madeleine? I doubt they found the experience very nice.

      The first two Portuguese policemen on the scene, referred to as Tweedledum and Tweedledee by Kate in her book, knew immediately that the abduction was staged. Yet 10 years on and millions of pounds spent, the 'British' still look like bumbling fools as they bend over backwards, sidewards and upside down to promote the abduction story.

      Rather than admit that the UK authorities were wrong to interfere in the Portuguese investigation in 2007, subsequent governments have continued the farce. No other victims, or suspects, in history have had so much MSM support, public money and resources as the parents of Madeleine McCann.

      Say for example Karen Matthews' scam had continued, six years on, would Scotland Yard have produced an age progressed picture of Shannen?

    4. It's almost 9 years since the Shannon Matthews scam.

      Poor Karen, thinking that she would be able to get away with it!

  17. Hi Rosalinda and everybody. Just a few words regarding the McCanns, as they are discussed here.

    People, who refuse to believe, that the McCanns could have something with the disappearance of their daughter to do, often argue that they would never have done so much for so many years to keep Madeleine in the public eye, if they had been guilty.

    In case the McCanns had chosen to go back home to Rothley in 2007, trying to lead a quiet and normal life, with a menacing cloud of suspicion hanging over their heads, justice would soon have caught up with them, and they must have known that. They also knew, right away, that their preposterous claims about a stranger abduction would eventually seem increasingly unlikely to most people, unless they, themselves, cultivated the myth of it.

    Therefore, they tried their best to make their grief, their despair and their faked innocence seem genuine. Naturally they had to stay in the lime light as much as they possibly could, to convince everybody about how distraught and devastated they were. They couldn’t possibly have known, that it would be for such a long time.

    Anyway, now after almost 10 years, it seems, as though they believe, that their innocence will never ever be officially questioned again. Their masks of innocence have become so tightly glued to their faces of guilt, that they cannot even see themselves, who they really are, behind their shields of blatant lies and hatred against anyone, who question their honesty, but haven’t they now become suspiciously quiet? 

    A whole society has been duped to believe in a stranger abduction, at least that’s what the McCanns think, and they may now feel, that they don’t have to keep on pretending so much as they used to do?

    Moreover, they have assured everybody, that they have confidence in the S Y and their investigation, although it has led absolutely nowhere, and they certainly will keep on praising it, as long as it deflects attention away from their own responsibilities and guilt.

    If they really are victims of a stranger abduction and truly believe, as they say, that their daughter is still alive, why do they not speak directly to her, which would be quite possible, as she would now be a teenager? We are spared, thankfully, such a farce.

    1. Only 3 days into the New Year and again you have made me stop and think Bjorn!

      I had always believed Gerry and Kate were seduced by the smell of the greasepaint and the roar of the crowd, lol. Or in a nutshell, vanity.

      Madeleine, albeit in tragic circumstances, offered them a way out of the rat race. Being a doctor is a job like any other, and unless it is a labour of love, it becomes a chore. Gerry told one reporter who asked how long they would stay in PDL, that it was 2/3 years until the twins started school. They were in no hurry to go back to work.

      I'm actually starting to feel a wee bit sorry for Gerry. He has seen many of his dreams wither and die over the past few years and there is no sign of any triumphant return.

      [Ps. and totally off topic, I have been glued to Netflix 'Borgia' (3 fecking seasons! I did not know that when I started) over the holidays. I mention it because my language keeps going all 15th century and God fearing at the mo. Loving it, obviously, but whilst I have no wish to be censoring anybody, it would be nice if they had a little 'reach for your pillow now' sign in the corner of the screen, for those of us of a namby pamby disposition].

      But returning to the woes of Gerry. I have to say, I admire that he aimed that high, he truly did believe that he was a leader of men, and destined to make his mark on the Laws of England. Thou shalt not besmirch me or the missus.

      And he got so close! There he was on the Whitehouse lawn, all bright and polished like a prospective new senator, then went on to appear at the Edinburgh Media Conference (why?) as the hero of oppressed libel claimants and missing children everywhere. What could possibly go wrong?

    2. Hi Bjorn, happy new year to you. Whatever the outcome of this case, Kate & Gerry at some point will have to accept responsibility of what happened to Madeline, either abduction or accidental death. As to being in the media highlight, again this is their own doing as I believe any support that they have must be dwindling daily, perhaps due to them sueing everyone that has a difference of opinion or getting books banned. This banning of books always backfires as people who had no interest whatsoever suddenly want to know why.

    3. I'm waffling, and drinking, please forgive me Bjorn. I also have the giggles.

      I doubt Gerry will ever have the humility to accept that his way hasn't really worked. I'm not sure who is the driving force behind all the libel actions. I suspect, he is more of a chancer and I suspect there was a lot of male bonding between himself and Clarence on the flight back to PDL.

      They were looking at long term, the wider agenda. As you say Bjorn, they had no option. To maintain the abduction story, they had to maintain the 'search'. I had always thought their best option would have been to keep a low profile in the hope the world would forget. But you have thrown a new light on this Bjorn, they had no option but to keep the 'Madeleine is Alive' myth going. Having said they would never give up, they simply couldn't.

      I think their best chance of 'getting out' was in November 2010. At that time the funds were running low and the McCanns were doing the media round. They were launching a Petition for a review of Madeleine's case. At that time, Kate of course knew she had a book deal worth millions, but regardless, they appealed for an itemised list: £10 buys prayer cards, £50 mans a hotline etc. A little disingenuous as Kate's book 'Madeleine' was being launched in April (then May because of Royal Wedding)2011.

      But rewind to November 2010. At that time they were launching a Petition for a review of Madeleine's case. Jim Gamble of CEOP had prepared a report and recommendations that he submitted to then Home Secretary, Alan Johnson.

      Purportedly that report sat on the desk of the Home Secretary until the change of Government and Theresa May took over. The McCanns said their calls for government action from Theresa May was met with 'fluffy words'.

      It seems Alan Johnson didn't look at the CEOP report, or if he did he decided to take no action. Theresa May took action in May 2011, coinciding with book launch, and appointed a team of 33+ specialist homicide detectives.

      I always thought this was a case of 'be careful what you wish for' and it's tumultuous consequences. But given the egos involved, it was probably more a case of taking as a New Labour would stay in power to bury the sins of their past.

    4. that should have read taken as a given, apologies.

    5. "Madeleine, albeit in tragic circumstances, offered them a way out of the rat race. Being a doctor is a job like any other, and unless it is a labour of love, it becomes a chore.
      I have to say, I admire that he aimed that high, he truly did believe that he was a leader of men, and destined to make his mark on the Laws of England. Thou shalt not besmirch me or the missus.
      And he got so close! There he was on the Whitehouse [White House?] lawn, all bright and polished like a prospective new senator, then went on to appear at the Edinburgh Media Conference (why?) as the hero of oppressed libel claimants and missing children everywhere. What could possibly go wrong?"

      On reading that I thought, WTF She's actually just another deranged McCann obsessive. But all was explained on this later post!

      "I'm waffling, and drinking, please forgive me Bjorn. I also have the giggles."

      LOL. ....Chez

  18. Oh look - bennett:

    "Re: The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo?

    Post by Tony Bennett Yesterday at 11:42

    A The original story from the McCanns about it being 'Maddie playing with Mummy's dressing-up box' is false"

    Now remind us what happened last time he made a direct accusation that the Mccanns are liars?????

    1. '' Anonymous3 January 2017 at 18:18
      Oh Christ - it seems like it is going to be another year of conspiracy theories and cover-ups without a shred of evidence.

      Still it keeps the forums and blogs running doesn't it!! ''
      Really ? That's an argument is it ? Stunning. Trust a sheep to take a shortcut in fear of having to wake up and thik. Ink wasters just waste space on blogs.

      ''Anonymous3 January 2017 at 19:33
      Oh look - bennett:

      "Re: The Mystery of the Make-Up Photo - was it taken on the same day as the Last Photo? ''

      Another plug for the cookie crew already . far too much importance is given to those who are allegedly laughed at on here..

      I'd like to say something about the McCann roadshow.
      As time passes, their media savvy grows. They show more confidence in front of the camera and in interviews. This could just be a case of practice, practice, practice. When you have the biggest media moguls and politicians-cum-PR people behind you, you're ready for TV at any level.But when off guard flaws show. There's no hiding place in the age of photograph -obsessives and the internet. I see( only my personal interpratation ) two types of 'pissed off' when i watch without a volume. I see Gerry angry at having to field questions and sell the narrative. I see Kate angry because she's simmering over a bigger picture and seldom looks in tune with Gerry unless they do the choreographed 'hold hands to show unity' dance on chat shows or breakfast televison interviews, or Doprah .

      It's true that the McCanns turn up in all the right places ( ie Whitehouse , Downing Street etc). Does anyone really think they thought of this plan themselves ? These are two of the most important buildings on the planet.It's strictly invitation only. It raises the awareness of the mystery, the 'determination' of the family, and the humanity( the biggest pile of mess of all of it) of politicians trying to look determined to find justice for Maddy because they know they've buried a ton of similar mysteries themselves and there's questions being asked on a daily basis of that p- and them. It's a win-win for them all. But the public are still remaining cynical. It's a classic ' I can't put my finger on it but...' case. maybe because, as usual, in cases like these, the evidence and genuine witness statements are 'disappeared' and if anyone questions it, they're branded conspiracy nutters. There was a pact of silence agreed upon by 9 people-that's a conspiracy. Evidence was dismissed on the orders of those who outrank the police-that was conspiracy.
      All evidence points, logically, to Madeleine no longer being with us. But it's still only speculation. That's all it can be unless someone finds her or the forensic evidence to say one way or another. But, on the subject of the growing public confidence and media savvy of the McCanns I'd like to explore another idea. It's an area i haven't seen explored yet. I look at the journey from 2007 to now. I see the images of the McCanns from news outlets and online.I see the changes that have taken place.

      1-shock and denial
      2-pain and guilt
      3-anger and bargaining
      4-depression, isolation,
      5-upward turn, out of the dark
      6-reconstruction, rebuilding
      7-acceptance and hope

      The seven stages of grief. If, as we're sold, there was just a case of no closure, they'd be stuck at stage 3. They appear to me as though they've passed through all 7 . They've mourned.
      The apparent ambassadors for all things child abduction related are selling the sincerity of guilty, frightened corrupt politicians and their media propaganda machine.That's why the job is so highly paid.

    2. I don't think there is a big conspiracy, my personal opinion is that high ranking people got involved and now have to run with it to save face. As there is so many organisations involved PJ, SY Labour & Tory Governments and Media someone somewhere would have blown the whistle by now. There is in my opinion no conspiracy. Someone had in all intents and purposes committed the perfect crime. Ive studied Jack The Ripper murders and read dozens of books, went through all theories from the outrageous to plausible and to be honest I believe the murderer is someone who the police probably overlooked. ( My theory is it was a police officer, he would know the area, can be trusted, knows the patrols and in those days attended autopsies hence some medical knowledge) I don't believe for one second the police then covered this up as I believe they just didn't know. Also don't forget The Yorkshire Ripper was caught by chance. In the end with the McCann case unless a body turns up or more evidence is forthcoming, we can only speculate as to the how, why, where & who.

    3. ZiggySawdust 3.1 @23:14

      Interesting post.

      “It's true that the McCanns turn up in all the right places ( ie Whitehouse , Downing Street etc). Does anyone really think they thought of this plan themselves ?”

      No, I don’t think they thought of this plan themselves. In fact, I have never believed that. I believe the McCanns were directed in what they should do and what they should say from day one.

      As for ‘the mystery of the make-up photo’, for me there’s no mystery at all. Creativity by Jon Corner and part of strategic planning. “Parents Kate and Gerry hope the [make-up] photo and a new video will trigger fresh leads.”, according to newspapers reports on 3 May 2010.

      “Her heartbroken parents have made the striking image available to mark today’s third anniversary of her tragic disappearance.”

      A present for Madeleine.

      And, as it happens:

      “The couple, from Rothley, Leics, visited Portugal last week to try to persuade police to re-open the investigation.

      They claim their team of three private investigators had discovered leads in police case files which had been dismissed.”

      As you say, acceptance and hope.


    4. Hi 19:33 and Happy New Year to you (I'm half Scots and Hogmanay last a week, lol).

      Did Bennett really say that? I actually hope the McCanns have reached the stage of ignoring him. They have spent hundreds of thousands on his attention seeking libel and given him the publicity he ached for. All to no avail, the man craves his day in Court, it's the only place ugly wannabe showmen can get the attention of a captive audience. Not only do they have to listen to him drone on, they have to write it down, gawd 'elp 'em.

      I must take a look at why the loon can categorically state Maddie playing with mummy's dressing up box is false? Htf would he know? Proves what a phoney he is, experts would never make a statement like that.

    5. I don't believe that the awful make-up was done by Madeleine herself but it can't be stated as 100% fact that she didn't.

    6. Wow Ziggy I am blown away by the eloquence of your prose, it is a joy to read. I consider myself very fortunate to have such intelligent and thoughtful contributors.

      Ahh, the 7 stages of grief. A subject that intrigues me also, many thanks for listing them. It seemed to me on the night Madeleine disappeared, the parents, Kate especially, went straight to stage 3 and skipped stage 2 entirely!

      But I suppose we ought to factor in that they were in full survival mode, pumped with adrenalin with their brains completely focussed. They are both athletes, they get their 'highs' by pushing their bodies to the limit, and the buzz of the competition. Unlike drunks and junkies, they can keep their emotions and their behaviour in check, in public at least.

      But returning to the stages. From their interviews it appears stage 5 kicked in after 48 hours - before then they were 'non functioning'. But at this stage, they should have placed all their faith in the police - the most likely hope of their daughter's return.

      With the police however, they were still at stage 2, anger. Their anger should have been towards themselves, but it was aimed at the police. At this stage, mere mortals would be totally dependent on 'Maddie's rescuers', they wouldn't be hostile towards them, they would be assisting them in every way they could.

      So much food for thought in your post Ziggy, many thanks.

    7. Hi NL, interesting. Although I am not sure I entirely agree with you on the McCanns being directed by others from the start.

      I think Gerry found his niche. He loved being followed around by the paparazzi, and he loved scolding them on his blog. He became quite the PR man, probably throwing in as many ideas as Clarence. If a picture paints a 1000 words, take a look at Gerry giving a presentation on the Wider Agenda.

      And to be fair, the campaign was phenomenal, within days the Madeleine donation chart went off the scale, and also the Madeleine website, when it passed it's first million. They were, quite literally, raking it in.

      For a while there Gerry and Kate had the Midas Touch, which is why they were courted by media moguls, prime ministers and faux compassionate celebrities. Unfortunately for them, most of it ended abruptly when they were made Arguidoes.

      Since then, those who most enjoyed the golden era have done their utmost to revive it. If it were a goose of the golden variety, it would be like trying to bring it back to life after it had been stuffed.

      Were I to write the movie, the integral scene would be that flight back to PDL starring Clarence and Gerry. It would capture that moment when you bond instantly with a stranger, when you realise one other thinks like you do. It was a bromance, but not of the sexual variety, more a meeting of minds. Now, I am trying to think who should play them, doh! Any suggestions would be much appreciated :)

      Totally agree on the makeup photo. Their friend Jon was a photographer, deh! If I had a friend who was a photographer I would probably be in full costume and make up every time he/she dropped by.

      I actually find it creepy that there are people out there who see sexual connotations in those photos. Who thinks like that? The muck comes from their own minds, nowhere else.

      I have many happy memories, and photographs, of myself as a child with my hair backcombed 'like The Supremes' by my mother. And the photographs were taken by a man, not a relative, a family friend. If any pretendy 'analyst','expert' or 'researcher' online claimed they were evidence of abuse, I would projectile vomit over them.

      I imagine Kate and Madeleine had great fun playing dressing up, that's what mums and daughters do ffs. I think those trying to attach sinister overtones to one of Kate's precious memories of her daughter, are simply being cruel for cruelties sake.

  19. @john 02:46

    ''I don't think there is a big conspiracy, my personal opinion is that high ranking people got involved and now have to run with it to save face ''

    That's actually a conspiracy

  20. Hi John and Hi Ziggy and a Happy New Year to you, if I’ve forgotten you

    I’m with you John, in that I’ve never ever believed in any conspiracy at all, just that there are a lot of stupid politicians and police detectives here and there, and that the McCanns are rather intelligent people, who have managed to dupe many of them by their faked commitment to finding their daughter. Many of them are quite aware of being fooled, and wish they had never sided with the McCanns, and they are just keeping quiet and waiting for the case to be closed, and avoid talking about it with anybody, let alone with one another. Not really conspiracy Ziggy. Cowardice, I would call it.

    We should never forget, that the first police officer, who arrived at the scene of the crime almost immediately concluded, that there had not been a break-in. Nor did he find any trace of an intruder. Consequently, he told the McCanns, what he believed, and that was, that there had not been an abduction.

    Being worried and innocent, and then hearing an experienced Police officer saying such a thing, a natural reaction would of course have been to feel comforted, at least for a while, and then to ask the Ocean Club staff and others to look for a little girl named Madeleine, who might have walked out from their apartment on her own. Instead they made the whole Portuguese P J their archenemy, for questioning, not them, but their abduction hypothesis. There could only have been one reason, as to why they did so.

    Had the abduction hypothesis been completely ruled out at that moment, an intensive search for, not just Madeleine alive, but also for her dead body, not too far away from McCann’s apartment would have come about, and the case would have been solved by now.

    This was actually a rather easy case from the beginning, but the McCanns themselves made it so complicated, in order to distract attention away from their own involvement. I really don’t feel like speculating, when talking about the McCanns’ guilt, as there is so much in the P J files supporting the hypothesis about Madeleine dying in the apartment and that Gerry and Kate may then have disposed of her body.

    I haven’t read Pat Brown’s book, though I believe she is a gifted criminal profiler, and I’ve just read a few selected chapters in Gonzalo Amaral’s book on the internet, instead I have focused a lot on the P J files, and I have also tried to watch and listen to what the McCanns have said publicly all these years.

    I really doubt that the McCanns have ever been investigated by the P J or by the S Y, since they “fled” from PDL in the autumn of 2007, so it’s about time now.

  21. Part 1 - Hi Ros, thank you for your words. High praise indeed coming from yourself. I appreciate it. I'm trying to breathe some life into things. There has to be something, somewhere, people have looked past in favour of the many red herrings.

    Ho Bjorn ( happy new year to you too )

    A conspiracy :a secret plan or agreement to carry out an illegal or harmful act, esp with political motivation; plot.

    I mention that so you know why I'm about to clarify a couple of your points.

    ''We should never forget, that the first police officer, who arrived at the scene of the crime almost immediately concluded, that there had not been a break-in. Nor did he find any trace of an intruder.''

    ( there was no need for a break in, the door was unlocked so could be opened quietly , but whoever entered the apartment would have to have known that no forced entry would be needed ; that frames the McCanns, Tapas 9, or watching predator. Wouldn't the McCanns, had they killed their child deliberately or by accident, at least have tried to stage a broken door or shutters scenario so they wouldn't be suspected ? )

    '' they made the whole Portuguese P J their archenemy, for questioning, not them, but their abduction hypothesis. There could only have been one reason, as to why they did so.''

    ( In challenging their abduction hypothesis they were accusing them of lying. it follows that such an accusation, even implied, is still an accusation. They were basically calling the parents suspects, and implying the abduction hypothesis was their denial of involvement> That's why they called them the enemy).

    ''Had the abduction hypothesis been completely ruled out at that moment, an intensive search for, not just Madeleine alive, but also for her dead body, not too far away from McCann’s apartment would have come about, and the case would have been solved by now. ''

    ( Nothing can be ruled out that fast. A child goes missing in the dark in a foreign country and there's no visible signs of struggles or violence and there's two distraught( genuine or not, the police wouldn't and can't make that guess so early) parents. The McCann's hypothesis, at that point, is supported because the child isn't there. Murder isn't supported as there's no body or nothing to suggest violence or struggle)

    1. No problems Ziggy. The written word is my greatest pleasure, and it is always a joy to see it used so eloquently.

      I am very fortunate to have so many enlightened, thinking, contributors to my blog. It was always my dream to belong to some sort of 'Bloomsbury Club'. I'm not entirely sure if I was drawn to the drink, drugs and promiscuity, or the exciting new ideas. I'll stay 50/50 on that one, lol.

      I jest, I flirt with everyone, tis my nature, ha ha. My sons rarely let me out unaccompanied, they are still looking for that 3rd signature on the committal form since the Judge dismissed the pawprint of an unwilling mutt, (also co-author of my early works) and held hostage to a packet of sausages. It was a traverse!

      But I digress. I do hope Ziggy, that in some way, shape and form, you are preserving your life for your forbears (is that the right word?). As I said, somewhere today, the pen is so much mightier than the sword. And if you have got the gift of the gab (and you have) you are blessed.

      I have a pet hate for writers who are pretentious, so fecking cryptic that you haven't got a clue what they are talking about. First rule of writing NO EXPOSITION, Show, don't Tell. Unfortunately, the pompous take this to extremes, they write only for those, who, like themselves are impressed with big obscure words. Whilst the rest of us are referring to the dictionary for some sort of translation, the plot is lost!

      Unashamedly, and over and over again, my dear old Dad was the greatest teacher I ever met. If he didn't know the answer, we would look it up and find out together. And he explained everything to me as if I was 4 years old, even when I was 40.

      He wasn't treating me as if I was dumb, he was just finding a way of explaining things to me so I could understand. I used the same methods myself as a lecturer, I brought the shortcuts to my 'state' students.

      You have much to say Ziggy and you say it with talent. It is worth preserving for children, your grandchildren, and the Star Trek generation. They say it is politicians and statesmen who change the world, but it isn't. It is the writers, those who challenge the status quo with their words.

      This is an exciting new era, a challenge for those of us still up for a gladiatorial head to head in any arena. The MSM may turn us away but we can create our own media. Let the audience decide.

  22. part 2
    '' This was actually a rather easy case from the beginning, but the McCanns themselves made it so complicated, ''

    If a case is easy from the beginning, charges are made fast. The McCann's didn't take the police off the case.They didn't bring in the Prime Minister of Britain or Portugal or military intelligence or the Home Office.They didn't take charge of the forensic investigation or lose and dismiss evidence already filed. They didn't call in a former intelligence officer / politician to represent them and co-ordinate any long term( there's your big big clue to what's happened) media campaigns- they were given them, in the same way they were given so much funding.

    ''I haven’t read Pat Brown’s book, though I believe she is a gifted criminal profiler''

    ( She is. But she acknowledges the bizarre and unprecedented over- involvement of a lot of politicians and says no more except, no conspiracy.Why no conspiracy ? Politicians talk behind closed doors before deciding on action. Her pre-scripted performance on Montel Williams' show -youtube- was down the same grid as Oprah's pantomimes)

    ''since they “fled” from PDL in the autumn of 2007''

    They didn't flee. They went home. From there, ever since , they've said and done nothing publicly spontaneously.The hijackers of the case( mainly our politicians but in concert with others abroad) have scripted and coordinated all of it. They have been made untouchable.That's a shame. If they're innocent, they'll still have the stigma of being suspected killers of their daughter when all they were doing was keeping quiet and defending yet another vile ring of psychopaths unknowingly. If they're guilty, it would have been quicker, far cheaper and easier to arrest, charge and imprison them,especially during a climate of global fear and suspicion surrounding so many people in high places and their covering up of crimes against children. But they chose the risky, expensive, career-threatening choice .Why would they do that. Seriously-why ?

    1. Hi Ziggy, Why do seemingly very intelligent people make the strangest choices in life? The history books are full of it. Quick point on your last comment regarding during a global fear and suspicion, remember this all happened well before Saville, Harris, Hall and the witch hunt that took place afterwards. I'm guessing by that time it was too late to back track on turning against the McCann, with particular reference on the witch hunt that followed in innocent people being accused of sexual crimes. As with other views perhaps the McCanns didn't flee, but they didn't stay either to assist the PJ in helping to find their daughter. Would innocent parents do that? I have worked with senior police officers and nearly all would say, yes it pays to have an open mind, yes sometimes crime scenes are not always what they appear to be, but all will say gut instinct is a good indication.

    2. Yes, Ziggy You have scored a few points here, but as I have said before; I’m not really much of an investigative detective, though I try to read the p j files when I get inspiration. I’m more emotional so to speak. As Rosalinda is now discussing another subject, I’ll just comment on one little thing.

      As for the McCanns’ staging of the crime scene, I don’t think they could have done it much better. If they had, for example, tried to scratch the untouched window opening with some kind of object to make it look more as if someone had entered or left through it, they would then have needed to get rid of that object and they certainly hadn’t too much time to do so. Not as easy as it may seem.

      Nor could they at any time have slid out through the opening, just to damage it a little bit as an intruder would have done, without the risk of being seen, and there would have been paint residues on their clothes. They could absolutely not have smashed any window, as they would have been seen entering and leaving the apartment, but still not any abductor near the apartment. They could of course have pushed the twins cots more apart, as well as they could have thrown Madeleine’s little pink blanket on the floor, making it look more like a crime scene. Yes, I really wonder why they didn’t.

      If I’m not mistaken, didn’t Gerry first say that the whole apartment was locked, but changed his statement the following day, saying the patio door was always unlocked. If I’m right on this point, then Gerry and Kate must have needed the open window, but a thief or an abductor would never have needed the open window as a red herring, unless that person had, or had had, some relation to the Ocean Club and access to the front door key, and therefore opened the window to make it look like a break-in, by a stranger, and then left by the front door.
      Possible, but very farfetched really.

    3. And witch hunt it was. Tom Watson out-eviled Vincent Price!

      So what have those who outed Saville, Harris, Hall et all achieved? How many children have they protected?

      I have sympathy for survivors. I am one! But I have nothing but scorn for those who claim their lives were fucked up because some rich old git once pinched their arse.

      At the age of 16, my mates and I went on a caravan holiday to the heart of darkness that was Great Yarmouth. Over the course of the week, at least 3 of us slept with the star turn of the resort night club. Were we traumatised? Not at all, we were laughing our heads off at Mr. X's OCD nightly routines and pretensions at being 10/15 years younger than he was.

      I think the majority of coppers would have had that gut instinct John. Maybe that is why 10 years later it is incredulous that it remains unsolved. It would be easy to blame the police, but I suspect their hands are tied more firmly on this case than any other. That is, it is not only Gerry McCann who is saying 'prove it'.

    4. " I have worked with senior police officers and nearly all would say, yes it pays to have an open mind, yes sometimes crime scenes are not always what they appear to be, but all will say gut instinct is a good indication."

      Which is why we get miscarriages of justice!

      "Maybe that is why 10 years later it is incredulous that it remains unsolved"

      Why? Many serious crimes remain unsolved.


    5. The key words in the above post were 'good indication' Chez. No-one is prosecuted on 'gut instinct' alone.

      Agree many serious crimes remain unsolved. Probably a lot more than we know. However, with advances in technology, even cases that are decades old are now being solved.

    6. Gut instinct can lead you in the wrong direction.... [Birmingham Six, Guildford Four?]

      You said "it is incredulous that it remains unsolved". It isn't.


  23. There's a back catalogue of pretty huge proportions filled with unsolved crimes. More often than not, it's because there was no eye witnesses, no forensic evidence and no identifiable modus operandi to use as a possible frame of reference. If the crime doesn't appear to be replicated thereafter it goes cold and stays cold.

    There's an impressively large amount of unsolved crimes due to them being dismissed by unwilling police forces or police forces that have been told to dismiss it ( Savile is a mere tip of an iceberg). The case of importance here, is the McCann one. Is that unsolved because the police were told to dismiss it ? Is it unsolved due to lack of credible evidence ? Or maybe unreliable statements and eye witness testimony ?

    Police force number one had the above mentioned 'gut instinct'. But he knew he'd need to find something tangible to reinforce it.He found blood, and dogs that found the scent of death. He found pretty contrasting and diverse descriptions of suspected abductors - so diverse there would be no common denominator, therefore none could stand up in court. He wasn't told to dismiss the investigation, he was actually dismissed himself. He wasn't told to disregard the forensic evidence, it was disregarded by his replacements on the orders of people above the police force. It's simple really, more than a couple of 'suits' sat down and said '' do we make this unsolvable ?'' What we should be asking is why they did..

  24. [It's simple really, more than a couple of 'suits' sat down and said " do we make this unsolvable ?"]

    Too, too silly.


  25. @chez
    It's hard to counter such a well structured argument i suppose (...)

    1. It was actually quite straightforward.


  26. A slobbering letch with bad hair chasing scantily clad lingerie models - that's a bit hard on Bill Clinton! Maybe Trump will be a disaster, but maybe he will do some good: cut funding for Planned Parenthood, keep men out of women's bathrooms, sort out the economy, rebuild relations with Russia.