Friday 31 March 2017

WHEN TO SCREAM COVER UP

Body Language speaks volumes

NEWS UPDATE SUNDAY 0.04.17

There are no new Madeleine stories this week, so the tabloids have  piggy backed onto the discovery of the remains of Isabel Celis, calling her the American Madeleine, in order to get the name Madeleine into the headline. 

For the McCanns however, it is a not a good comparison.  The parents of Isabel Celis, like the McCanns, claimed their daughter was stolen during the night as they slept - they were at least in the same building.  However, a huge cloud of suspicion hangs over them.  Alerts by blood and cadaver dogs in the Celis home led to a change in the investigation, and no abductor has been found in 5 years. According to the reports, the body of Isabel was not discovered 'happenstance', ie, they had a tip off.

Meanwhile the British tabloids continue to get themselves all worked about nothing, and then publishing it.  The evil Dr. Amaral is lording it up in Switzerland, penning a second novel to heap yet more misery on eternal victims Gerry and Kate.  Then err, he isn't. They are making it all up. The media battle to blame Goncalo Amaral for all the McCanns woes, becomes increasingly more pathetic and desperate.  His silence equals a luxury alpine vacation while the parents suffer.  Subtext - hate him, support them.   


UPDATE SATURDAY 01.04.17

I see the charmless Teddy Shepherd has responded to this latest blog with 'sit down and shut the f*ck up you c*nt'.  No sign of censorship or sexism there, lol. What Teddy lacks in vocabulary, he makes up for with his ability to copy and paste.  In 'show and tell', he would be a straight A. 

Teddy believes that Theresa May is up to here ears in the McCann mess.  I disagree, for many reasons.  For example, the above picture shows TM physically close to Coral Jones, with her body tilted towards her, and her right hand crossed over to her left.  Whilst the closeness was probably instigated by Coral, who looks like the kind of warm Mum who hugs everyone, TM has not stepped away, nor has she drawn Kate in.  The trio are two, plus one. 

What is scary, is the fact that Teddy's rather odious little tweet got 5 likes, 1 r/t and 1 comment asking why he reads my garbage.  It seems, even though I too, do not believe the abduction story, I am more hated on twitter than the former suspects.  And the hatred is being directed by a soft toy in a sailor's hat!  If you're so brave Teddy, why not say the above in your real name? 

______________________________________________


The past few weeks can't have been very pleasant for Gerry and Kate McCann.  Not only do they now have to stump up for their huge losses in the Lisbon Civil Courts, but the backlash against the perceived cover up has begun.  The verdict of the Portuguese Supreme Court was damning, they made British Libel Law look archaic, as they ruled, quite rightly, in favour of Freedom of Speech.  They also made a point of clarifying the British misinterpretation of the Portuguese archiving report.  That is, the McCanns were never cleared of involvement in their daughter's disappearance. 

Meanwhile, this small corner of the internet is gripped to the ongoing saga that is Madeleine's McCann's disappearance, discussion now turns (once again) to what exactly are Operation Grange doing?  I think it would be fair to say most anti's believe the case will have an unsatisfactory end, with the case filed away among Official Secrets.  Some believe the McCanns will be exonerated, with the 'no evidence' chant holding firm.  The latter of course being the same belief held by the Pro's. 

This case, it would seem has turned us all into cynics.  Yeh we can see the blatant lies, yeh we can see the cover, and yeh, we are powerless.  All true, sadly.  But only if you have lost every last shred of faith you have in human nature.

I am not a fan of Theresa May, she reminds me of my old headmistress.  That is she has such a firmly entrenched sense of right and wrong - she is not open to persuasion, or corruption.  TM's falling out with Jim Gamble is probably one of the most significant events in the history of this case.  At the same time the McCanns were criticising the Home Secretary for her lack of action on the CEOP report and her fluffy words.  The idea that she would put her own reputation, and indeed legacy, on the line to protect them and their champion Jim, is very unlikely.  So too, the idea that she would keep issuing cheques for an investigation that was going nowhere. 

Despite the fact that I have seen jawdropping miscarriages of justice in this case, I still have a few scraps of faith left in human nature.  It was touching to see so many respond to Goncalo Amaral in his hour of need, especially the generous donation from his English counterparts in the Metropolitan Police. 
Each and every one of them is, I am sure, fully aware,  that 'there but for the grace of God go I'.  The McCanns will destroy anyone who opposes them, ex detectives especially. 

I think we go into full tin foil hat territory if we imagine that the British Government are conspiring with the Portuguese government, ditto their police forces, in order to cover up whatever happened to Madeleine McCann.  In order for that to happen, it would have to involve the collaboration of the highest departments in both governments, plus the agreement of 30+  homicide detectives and admin, to cover up the death of a child.  I just don't see it.

However, I have been around this case long enough to expect the unexpected, lol.  I actually feel pity for those who made their minds up 10 years ago with no room for manoeuvre.  I think now there is Something in the Air, the tide is turning, the tabloids seem to be testing the waters.  The comments pages of the popular newspapers are probably the most accurate gauge of public opinion and it would appear support for Gerry and Kate has dropped to an all time low. 

These are sensitive times, and I'm going to use my most loathed phrase 'think of the children'.  I would call on all those who read here and discuss the case generally, to search their hearts for some compassion.  It will probably take years to unravel the effect this scam has had, not only on the people directly affected, and err hum, persecuted, but also on New Labour, all those police agencies who interceded and those Charities who leapt onboard. 

As in the late summer of 2007, Gerry, Kate and their friends still have a lot of questions to answer.  This is however the 21st Century.  There is no place for pitchforks and angry mobs, and there shouldn't be a place for a vigilante websites to carry out their own 'investigation', 'trial' and 'verdict' either. They are not seeking truth, they are seeking retribution, and that's always a bad motive.  I'm not saying ban or censor them, ignoring them works best.  Decent people avoid such vindictive places like the plague.  Out of tragedy should come enlightenment.  Punishing people doesn't change them, it is a deterrent for others.  Those committing crimes should of course be punished.  And they should not be allowed to continue, but any punishment should be via the judicial process, not an angry mob. 

My feeling is that we are presently in a countdown, an unravelling, a final date has been revealed.  The purpose of a police investigation is usually to build a case for prosecution.  I can't ever recall an investigation to clear someone, not by the police anyway.  At the moment we are all wondering what Operation Grange are up to?  If they are going to declare the parents innocent, ffs, do it now and stop prolonging their agony - that's just callous.  Or is it going to end with spectacular tabloid front pages and an expose by Panorama? 

What it can't do after 6 years and nearly £12million is disappear with no questions asked.  The McCanns created a media storm.  Scotland Yard created a media storm.  David Cameron and Rebekah Brooks created a media storm.  All a bit reckless if the case of missing Madeleine is destined to be shelved as a cold case and filed away under the Official Secrets Act.  

At the moment there is no need for petitions or indeed pressure groups.  We simply don't know what the outcome of Operation Grange will be.  In the unlikely event that they declare Madeleine 'taken' by traffickers, burglars, swarthy, ugly, men, then will be the time to scream 'cover up'. 




96 comments:

  1. The Smiths sighting is constantly being heavily denied by some people. "Don't mention the Smiths, or ...". I don't understand why. Unless some so called truth seekers are in fact paid or otherwise 'put under pressure' by TM. Did the Smith family, Mr. Jez Wilkins and Mrs. Fenn follow a script with their statements? To please that other 'family'? Come on! I fear that some people are scripting the story right now, online, under our noses. This case has become a game, and a very tricky one.
    A voice from abroad. No armchair detective.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I think we go into full tin foil hat territory if we imagine that the British Government are conspiring with the Portuguese government, ditto their police forces, in order to cover up whatever happened to Madeleine McCann".

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0MaNt2M3Mg

    Much talk of finding 'a solution to the situation'. No mention of finding the child.

    "In order for that to happen, it would have to involve the collaboration of the highest departments in both governments, plus the agreement of 30+ homicide detectives and admin, to cover up the death of a child. I just don't see it".

    Yes and No.

    Inter-governmental collaboration is entirely feasible. That's what Ambassadors are for. And darn my socks if ours wasn't the second diplomat on the scene, assuming personal responsibility for the very functions Consular staff are paid to discharge.

    And who was that standing next to Ambassador Buck at the impromptu outdoor press conference? Bless me if it wasn't Vice Consul Bill Henderson. So why was Buck even there?

    Everybody else just does as they're told, with information on a need to know basis (what else do you do when you've a mortgage to pay and kids to support?). Whistleblowers with a death wish, even a metaphorical one, are few and far between and all too quickly ostracized.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Anon 31 March at 15:34
      Hi
      I watched the You Tube clip you referred to. Quite interesting really.

      The British Foreign Minister talks about what “we” want and that is getting as much attention to the Madeleine case as possible, which echoes the McCanns’ rhetorics and suggests, that she’s talking about the search for Madeleine, and not really about the need to reinvestigate the McCanns, besides she expresses feeling of sympathy for the couple.

      However, it isn’t quite clear if “we” refers to her and her Portuguese colleague or just to herself and to the S Y/the Met. Nevertheless, I find it interesting that the Portuguese Minister neither mentions anything about the importance of getting attention to the case, but just talks about finding a solution to it, which of course implies, that he thinks that there’s more to it than just looking for Madeleine. Thus, on the political level each country has its own view upon the case and how the investigation/search should proceed. Is that what they've been discussing, that is, their different opinions on the case?

      Delete
    2. @15:34

      "Much talk of finding 'a solution to the situation'. No mention of finding the child."

      Perhaps they knew Madeleine was not a living, findable child.

      14 May 2007

      http://www.aparchive.com/metadata/youtube/93b63b485e33848c53b2164ba3dbfb0a

      Luis Amado, Portuguese Foreign Minister:

      "Certainly we are concerned. We are all concerned. I even had the possibility to speak with my colleague, Margaret Beckett. We have done all our best to have a solution for this situation. Certainly we will be working closely with our police and with the co-operation of British police in the next days and weeks if necessary to find a solution for this situation."

      Delete
    3. I still can't c/p (blushing smiley). Does the youtube video have a title 15:34?

      Delete
    4. Rosalinda @08:38

      I am not 15:34, but perhaps I can help.

      Google:

      British and Portuguese FMs comment on latest on search for Madeleine McCann

      Also:

      ap archive metadata eu missing girl

      Delete
  3. Just a rehash of the usual nonsense, but this, (yes,from THIS blog) made me laugh.

    "This is however the 21st Century. There is no place for pitchforks and angry mobs, and there shouldn't be a place for a vigilante websites to carry out their own 'investigation', 'trial' and 'verdict' either. They are not seeking truth, they are seeking retribution, and that's always a bad motive."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This blog isn't about investigating people and putting them on public trial 16:23, I muse.

      There are no 'research' files on this blog, I haven't stalked those who's names were revealed in the PJ files. I haven't investigated this case (from my armchair - as if!) and I don't claim to know what happened. I am just as appalled by the behaviour of some anti's as the general public.

      I'm seeking truth 16:23, and so are my readers. Gerry and Kate invited us into their ongoing saga, staying on the front pages has kept the interest going. We are the 'water cooler' discussion they were aiming for.

      My own fixation with this case is based on my interest in psychology and human behaviour. I have no interest in the punishment side of law and order, I am too much of a wuss.

      I was once called for jury service - I don't know why people complain, I loved it! True there is a lot of hanging about, but I was so captivated by the environment and the atmosphere, I didn't mind a bit.

      My heart went out to the defendant in the case we were allotted. He was a 16 year old boy accused of knife crime. Perhaps they should ask jurors if they are movie fans before sending them in, because I pretty much took on the role of Henry Fonda in 12 Angry Men! The young lad was cleared, quite rightly, he was attacked by a gang of drug crazed men in their 20's. I was proud that I was able to enlighten my fellow jurors, though I can't take too much credit, the Judge was advising us in that direction. I tend to take a bit of artistic licence when I tell that anecdote, sometimes I'm Atticus Finch!

      The experience however, taught me that I am 'just too soft' as my old dad used to say, constantly, lol. I am eternally grateful that I don't now and never will, have responsibility for handing out punishments.

      For me following this case has been a gigantic learning curve 16:23, filled with 'well, I never' moments. As a child of the 60's, all my beliefs in the GREAT Britain I grew up in, have been shattered!

      There is nothing abusive or libellous in my blog. I have never, in the all the years I have been writing about this case, received any sort legal letter or warning.

      I am not trying to stir up angry mobs - I am doing the opposite. That is, I am advising compassion and saying loud and clear, leave it to the police.

      You might try to attach the hater label to my blog 16:23, but those who actually read it, can see that it's not.

      Delete
  4. 24 May, 2011

    "Portuguese detectives, helped by officers from Leicestershire Police, carried out a massive investigation into her disappearance.

    But the official inquiry was formally shelved in July 2008 and since then no police force has been actively looking for the missing child.

    Scotland Yard's review of the case, which will be funded by the Home Office, was launched earlier this month after a request from Home Secretary Theresa May supported by Prime Minister David Cameron.

    It is being led by Detective Chief Inspector Andy Redwood of the Met's Homicide and Serious Crime Command.

    Sir Paul [Stephenson] said the final report would not be published."

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/madeleine-mccann-no-limits-to-probe-180425

    ReplyDelete
  5. Far be it from me to be pedantic, but isn't it the public who will actually be stumping up for their huge losses in the Lisbon Civil Courts via the donations they gave in good faith to search for Madeleine?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Bananamouze

      Far be it for me to be honest - no - I donated and I don't care what they spent the money on. The money I donated was to support the Mccanns in any way they wanted.

      Delete
    2. Idiot and misleader @ 02.15, they did not ask for money to support themselves in any way they wanted, they asked for money to find their daughter. Your bullshit attitude and trying to deflect boils my piss, why dont you sod of before you start telling us all how your so happy with their new extension that you paid for.

      Delete
    3. 02:15, 15:34

      The woodcutter and his wife.

      Delete
    4. @ anon 00.31

      please explain.

      Delete
    5. @ Anonymous1 April 2017 at 15:34

      In your eagerness to insult me you forgot one important thing.

      I will not bother to try to enlighten you because your ignorance is my pleasure.

      Delete
    6. Gerry has been chopping firewood on Kate's face for the last ten years, hence the way she looks now.

      Delete
  6. Come to think of it, what was Henderson doing there even?

    According to the Consulate's own web-site:

    “What our consulates cannot do for you:

    “…give you legal advice, investigate crimes or carry out searches for missing people...”.

    A chance to get out of the office I suppose.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Anonymous31 March 2017 at 17:00

      did he give legal advice, investigate the crime or search for Madeleine?

      Delete
    2. None of the above.

      His side-kick Angela Morado 'phoned Gerry on his mobile at half-past midnight though. When it came to the public broadcast, Henderson let Buck do all the talking.

      Delete
    3. There is no doubt the actions of the British Consulate were way over the top 10:25, almost as if the instructions came fro the PM himself.

      However, when discussing the British Consulate, we should remember the WikiLeaks entry. I don't have it immediately to hand, but as I recall John Buck was voicing suspicions, and the British cops were 'building a case' against the McCanns.

      I tend to think direct government assistance for the McCanns stopped at the end of June 2007, as too did the hospitality of Warners PDL. Perhaps there was dissent among the ranks?

      Delete
  7. If Operation Grange cannot find a solution the case will become cold and will be reviewed in the future - as happens in all UK Police unsolved cases. They will not declare anyone guilty or innocent and they will certainly not issue a DVD of the investigation to be released to the press and/or internet "sleuths". There will be no need to hide things behind Official Secrecy.

    Who knows what the Portuguese will do with their side of the investigation. Shelve it and release everything again?

    ReplyDelete
  8. There has been several 'backlashes' during this saga, not just ones pointing toward any cover ups. The biggest, and most highly charged and insanely sustained has been the one aimed at the parents obviously.But that's come to bore me now...

    The libel case has been hailed as a victory for a man who wrote a book,The gushing and celebrations sparked by this monumental event is as energetic and excitable as the anger directed at the parents. No need to call Sherlock to join those two particular dots.If that's the only reason to break out the bunting and dance in the streets while a defenceless little girl still is still ,missing-presumed by most as dead- it's a dark day for the human nature we're supposed to have faith in.

    I thought a miscarriage of justice could only earn that tag after a verdict is reached in a court, then a sentence passed.If you mean that you've witnessed( as have we all) more than a couple of examples of justice being obstructed and / or perverted, then I'm with you on that page. From the moment Madeleine's fate took a wrong turn, that's been the game. It's easy to be blase when dismissing 'conspiracy theories' . It was even quite trendy 15 years ago and made you sound 'in touch'. But too many 'crackpot' theories have been shown to be on the mark and made the 'official narrative' look 'crackpot'. Can anyone say two ordinary parents received unprecedented protection from so many politicians and dismiss conspiracies ? Or can anyone state with 100% conviction that incriminating forensic evidence was shelved when it should have been evidence for a prosecution-then dismiss conspiracies ? A long-serving detective is allowed 5 minutes on a case then removed for-what exactly ? But the politicians put their men in-and then put another in to handle all future media reports and paid the 2 parents that they were determined to protect( thus make look like prime suspects for whatever reason).

    Whatever the outcome chosen by all of the above, it won't be
    satisfactory.It can't be now.

    Anonymous31 March 2017 at 15:34

    On the money. Well said.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ZiggySawdust at 17:51

      "Anonymous31 March 2017 at 15:34

      On the money. Well said."

      Agreed.

      Delete
    2. @ Ziggy/Insane....for the millionth time...IT WAS NOT A LIBEL CASE. This is why no one takes your silly ramblings seriously because you constantly write UNTRUTHS.

      STOP IT !!

      Delete
  9. Hi Ros,

    I don't believe there has been a cover up or conspiracy. At most it's protecting red faces when they jumped on the bandwagon. I believe this stems from the press when they dared to print MPs expenses and refused to toe the line. I'm all for a free and impartial press, regardless what they print. The Leeveson enquiry to me was a whitewash. All z list celebrities giving their sob stories when the press turned against them, but we're happy when the press promoted them. Now for arguments sake, suppose the press phone hacked a paedophile ring, and located Madeleine. I'm sure the parents would be singing the praises of investigative journalism and how wonderful a free press is. But I believe and along with a lot of others the press also and still do suspect that the parents are involved in Madeleine's disappearance.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi John
      " But I believe and along with a lot of others the press also and still do suspect that the parents are involved in Madeleine's disappearance"

      At least their readers do so, judged by the comments in most papers nowadays.

      Delete
  10. @19:59

    "....I'm sure the parents would be singing the praises of investigative journalism and how wonderful a free press is."

    There's no reason to believe the McCanns don't believe in 'a free press'. Maybe you're mistaking 'investigative journalism and how wonderful a free press is' with the lies put out by those parts of the Press who subsequently paid out large sums to the McCanns, the Tapas Seven, Robert Murat.....?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I doubt investigative journalism is popular with those being investigated 23:05 - their usual response is 'it's all lies' and of course some take it to the libel courts.

      Delete
    2. @08:48

      You're confusing investigative reporting and publishing lies. You can't argue with the former and you can't be supportive of the latter. If the former leads to the latter, you deserve everything imposed on you.
      You seem unprepared to accept that lies were printed about the McCanns, the Tapas Seven and Robert Murat, with the resulting libel payouts.

      Delete
  11. I'd just like to make a comment re the picture at the top of this post and captioned "Body Language speaks volumes".

    This is the sort of silliness you get from 'Teddy' and others on the #McCann Twitter tag. There's no evidence to suggest the caption is anything other than hater-speak. I offer a contrasting image where you could make exactly the opposite inference.

    http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/24/article-2149254-13414201000005DC-926_634x383.jpg

    ReplyDelete
  12. " It was touching to see so many respond to Goncalo Amaral in his hour of need, especially the generous donation from his English counterparts in the Metropolitan Police. "

    Now he has won, and the Mccanns are going to pay his court costs it will be fascinating to see which charity he will be passing the money to.

    Incidently Ros - there is a full list of people who donated somewhere on-line.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. you Idiot 02.20. why on earth would he give any money he made to charity, he has been shackled for years and deserves too get his life back, and if he gets apenny in compensation, then good luck to him.I did not see any charities contributing to his court costs, so why should he contribute to them. I would like to bet you are one of those morons who never buys a lottery ticket , but would be the first asking wheres my cut if someone you know won.

      You need to go away and GROW UP.

      Delete
    2. @02.20
      Please point me to the information showing where the MCCanns have ever given a penny to charity??????

      No??

      Didnt think so .

      Delete
    3. @ anon 17.42

      from the Gofundme itself: "If any funds are left unused, they will be donated to a Portuguese children’s charity, according to Gonçalo Amaral’s wishes."

      They are unused because the Mccanns will be paying all of Amaral's costs.

      Delete
  13. "Body Language speaks volumes"

    With your vast experience in absolutely everything - what does the body language tell you Ros?

    ReplyDelete
  14. @Anon 1 April 2017 at 02:23
    Hi
    Let me just make a try to put words to the picture in question, regarding Theresa May's facial expression. It says "From now on Kate you're under my protection" and Kate's look reveals that she's no doubt about that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @09:12
      '"From now on Kate you're under my protection" and Kate's look reveals that she's no doubt about that'

      You can read that from the picture? You're having a laugh, surely. I think you'll find that Ros has totally the opposite reading! Just for fun, have a go with this picture:

      http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/24/article-2149254-13414201000005DC-926_634x383.jpg

      Delete
    2. I'm afraid 10:50 is right Bjorn - I see the opposite! The warm Coral has stepped in close to TM, which to me translates trust and hope. Kate remains detached. Possibly because it is one ice lady standing next to another, but Kate as usual, looks very uncomfortable. I'm surprised the photographers didn't ask her to move in closer, or maybe they did, and she pretended not to hear.

      Delete
    3. @11:51

      Body language, eh. See what you want to see! How about giving us your expert opinion on this one, Ros.

      http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2012/05/24/article-2149254-13414201000005DC-926_634x383.jpg

      Delete
    4. I'd love to but I a unable to c/p :( Is there a headline above picture that I can google?

      Delete
    5. Hi Rosalinda and thanks Anon 10:50 for reference
      Maybe your psychological analysis of the picture Rosalinda is correct, if we just assume that Kate has some "self awareness" and that it's May's "integrity" that keeps Kate at distance.

      Delete
    6. @12:28
      You could search for 'Kate McCann talked to the Duchess of Gloucester'

      Delete
    7. @12:38

      "Maybe your psychological analysis of the picture Rosalinda is correct"

      LOL. You caved in too easily, Björn. Ros is no more an expert than you are!

      Delete
    8. I don't claim to be an expert on body language Bjorn, but it is a 'ology' I have studied for 30+ years. I read a lot of self-help books in the 80's lol, I was trying to figure why the men I loved hated me! :( It took a lifetime to discover it was probably my big gob, but by then it was too late to change ;)

      It is incredible how much a picture can reveal, for example those celebrities who like to give the impression that they have a happy marriage or that they are heterosexual when they clearly aren't. I could write an entire blog about Donald and Melania! lol.

      Coral is the archetypal cuddly mum, the opposite of Kate and the reason Kate believes people don't like her. But it goes deeper than that. Kate is uncomfortable with people she doesn't know to the point where she actually shows signs of paranoia. Especially if she hasn't got Gerry to cling onto.

      A confident woman, who was grateful to her hostess/ benefactor, would have cosied up to TM as Coral did. Kate has much to thank TM for, why so distant?

      Delete
    9. @13:07

      "Coral is the archetypal cuddly mum, the opposite of Kate and the reason Kate believes people don't like her. But it goes deeper than that. Kate is uncomfortable with people she doesn't know to the point where she actually shows signs of paranoia. Especially if she hasn't got Gerry to cling onto. A confident woman, who was grateful to her hostess/ benefactor, would have cosied up to TM as Coral did. Kate has much to thank TM for, why so distant?"

      Hysterical. Enough! I'm out.

      Delete
    10. Hi Rosalinda
      No doubt whatsoever that you can see more than I do. I honestly find it's interesting what you say. I didn't even notice the physical distance between May and Kate, or that that could have any meaning.

      Delete
  15. Is Gerry McCann a Freemason? Called on brothers in high places from the beginning?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Mar 31, 2017

    "Investigators locate remains of Isabel Celis, 6-year-old girl who went missing in 2012"

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/investigators-locate-remains-isabel-celis-year-girl-missing/story?id=46503146

    -------------------------

    April 23, 2012

    'The search for Celis intensified after two FBI search dogs hit upon something in the Celis family home overnight. Villasenor noted that there was a cadavaer dog and a scent dog used in the search.

    "We have information we obtained from the dogs that has necessitated more follow-up investigation," Tucson Police Chief Roberto Villasenor said today.'

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/missing-tucson-girl-isabel-celis-surveillance-videos-hold/story?id=16210060

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Very sad, and thank you for the update 10:06. Apparently finding Isabel's remains 'was not 'happenchance'' (a new word for me), it says a lot. I expect the story will quickly unfold now, but I don't think it will assist with Madeleine's abduction story. As you mentioned, FBI search dogs hit on something that changed the course of the investigation. For Gerry and Kate those are not good similarities.

      Delete
    2. @Anon 10:06 and @Rosalinda 12:36
      I had to look it up. Isabel Celis’s parents in their appeal to the public do not show any feelings. Her father is the one who tries to act as if he were desperate and devastating, but fails completely, while his wife doesn’t even try to fake any emotions. I’ve no idea about under what circumstances their daughter disappeared, but her parents are cold as ice behind their masks.

      http://abcnews.go.com/US/missing-tucson-girl-isabel-celis-surveillance-videos-hold/story?id=16210060

      Delete
    3. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4369946/Tucson-police-Remains-missing-6-year-old-found.html

      One of the comments:

      jdaahir42-Tucson, United States
      She lived a block away from me. I personally think that the creepy dad was involved. As for the sons being kept away from the dad, it was for their own good, because a certain female child in the household was being investigated by CPS because of recurring infections that she had. May she RIP.

      Delete
  17. Aargh. Looks like the Twitter.com/#McCann mob may be taking an interest in this blog.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Their need for an enemy and someone to pillory does make their motives questionable 10:53. I don't care if they disagree with my opinion, but surely I'm entitled to have one?

      My 'crime' I think, is the fact that I don't think this case has anything to do with Paedophilia. No paedophiles networks or gangs, no grubby little groups of middle class professionals swapping kids and photos and no swarthy predators hiding in the bushes waiting to steal your kids if you go out to dinner.

      This is, I imagine, a huge disappointment to those desperate to sex the story up. Those who have gone to so much trouble to find little add ons to support their bonkers theories. They don't judge this case on reason and common sense, they judge it on memories of lurid News of the World headlines from the days of yore.

      Teddy Shepherd is disgruntled I believe, because he thinks he is standing up for victims of child abuse. However, like many who teeter on the wings, he is doing so with very little knowledge or understanding of his subject.

      Unfortunately, he is trapped by his own 'I'm right, dead right' philosophy. He can't back down, he can't admit that he might be wrong, so he has to abuse those who don't agree with him. He has taken the pro McCann stance. 'I have nothing to dispute what you say, so I will just call you names'.

      Delete
    2. @12:09

      "he is trapped by his own 'I'm right, dead right' philosophy"

      LOL. Who isn't?

      Delete
    3. Oh I'm sorry @10.53 are us "twitter.com/#mccann mob" not allowed to read or comment on this blog?! Well maybe you should ask Ros to stop tweeting a link to it...Just saying

      Delete
    4. Rosalinda @12:09

      "Teddy Shepherd is disgruntled I believe, because he thinks he is standing up for victims of child abuse. However, like many who teeter on the wings, he is doing so with very little knowledge or understanding of his subject."

      You believe...because... he thinks, etc.

      Well there's no denying he thinks, but the supposition that he's encroaching upon your own area of expertise is unfounded. And if he should be concerned with another subject altogether, who are we to question his knowledge or experience of it?

      Perhaps he is not so much disgruntled as ashamed. Not for himself, but for the fact that the death of a little girl a decade ago, quite possibly at the hands of an adult, has become shrouded, not in mystery, but a blanket of lies, articulated by the parents, their immediate circle of friends, at least one employee of HM government and more than one senior member of UK police.

      If that little inventory of integrity isn't enough to promote nausea I'm not sure what is.

      It seems that for many, Madeleine McCann has become little more than a topic for idle gossip, mediated by Twitter for the most part, in lieu of the more traditional garden fence.

      Delete
    5. Yup, just stop advertising your blog on #mccann then Ros

      Delete
    6. @ Anonymous1 April 2017 at 18:36

      "Yup, just stop advertising your blog on #mccann then Ros"

      Yes - Ros links this blog to #mccann on a daily basis and has done so for a long time.

      By linking she is inviting people to come here and comment or to comments on #mccann.

      Ros has often posted shit photoshopped images with stupid captions by the teddy shepherd crank in the past and in fact she has welcomed his comments here - under the name of "himself" in the past.

      Delete
  18. And so the bandwagon rolls on, with many no longer on board. You wonder actually if the McCanns, unseeen for some considerable time in the flesh, are actually on it themselves. Whether Mitchell clutching is dismissal email, still is?

    Poor Mrs May, what she did was to say NO, like the two previous Home Secretary's refusal, based on Gamble (off the bandwagon it would appear) £100k scoping exercise, on the back of all his razzmatazz with the Facebook alert button and a platform stance on every issue, but still his department\quango went down CEOP. Oh and remember the 'going' viral message & send me your photos, emmmm wonder how many responses to that? Added to the melting pot that was left to the MET to sort out.

    What happened next is worthy of mention for those who don't know was the Cameron (Norton Set) Brooks and the Sun. Much is history, as is Leveson enquiry, but the result of Brooks blackmail of an open letter, resulted in the £12m enquiry. Rest is history.

    You see the strangest thing about this case is the FACTS and TRUTH actually speak for themselves. It doesn't need PR, over exposure or lies. Since everything in this is based on the truth: Smith sighting, Mrs Fenn hearing child\children crying, children being left, night after night, failure of Mrs McCann to answer the 48 Qs, failure of the friends (T7) to return & re-enact the evening. These are FACTS. But you see, under the layer of the truth, is not lies but the truth that wasn't told. And there is the answer to the conundrum.

    Have the MET re-interviewed the McCanns and their friends? In English, not pre-scripted roggie, pre-read & agreed questions, but gloves off, spontaneous in English without the need for translations.

    Have they? Because if they haven't' what a farce £12m+ spent on the MET has been.

    If the MET shelve this, they surely can be no rule in the rule book, that it contains sensitive material requiring closure under the secrecy act & if it did or does - then the case would flag up more alarm bells than less.

    The McCanns and their friends, remain innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law.

    I would not want to be in their shoes. I would not want to walk their path in life. I would wilt and die to have to live in this long shadow. But then, neither would I have gone to bed, whether I slept or not, knowing a child I knew was missing. And that is what is peculiar about this case, it's surreal behaviour.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. A wonderful read 12:56, many thanks for your contribution.

      Delete
    2. "A wonderful read 12:56"

      I wouldn't say that quite, but it does resonate with this from Anonymous yesterday @16:46 (taken from a Daily Mirror report on Operation Grange):

      "Sir Paul [Stephenson] said the final report would not be published."

      What should be blindingly obvious from this statement is that the Met. can float publicly, via the media, whatever fulfilment of their remit they consider fits best, irrespective of what gets written in the final report, which as like as not no one outside of the Gold Group will be in a position to read and which will be archived at the records office with a 'not to be opened until...' sticker on the cover.

      Delete
  19. Anonymous1 April 2017 at 14:11

    ''Perhaps he is not so much disgruntled as ashamed. Not for himself, but for the fact that the death of a little girl a decade ago, quite possibly at the hands of an adult, has become shrouded, not in mystery, but a blanket of lies''

    ''..articulated by the parents, their immediate circle of friends, at least one employee of HM government and more than one senior member of UK police.''
    ''It seems that for many, Madeleine McCann has become little more than a topic for idle gossip, mediated by Twitter for the most part, in lieu of the more traditional garden fence.''

    Impressive summation.

    I have to say, with reference to the 'reading' of the photograph at the top of the page, it's bordering on Monty Python. It's worse than the endless 'you can just tell' expert conclusions of those who watched interviews on camera and 'spotted' the leaks in their facial expressions and 'heard' the embedded confessions in their speech ( thanks again Youtube ). If anyone wants to 'observe' someone properly( and i emphasises observe, rather than just look at) they'd do well to realise that any conclusions of any worth can only be reached in studying their subject(target ?) in unguarded moments in natural situations.That's the only time you can be sure they're being natural-or 'true' . Interviews don't fit this.Nor do consciously posed-for photographs. The conclusions people arrive at and try to pass off as valid are no more than a glimpse into their own mind and often a reflection of their own bias. All that picture says to me is : '' I can't believe we chose these odd dresses when we could have worn smart suits.You can't buy taste or style eh girls.Let's just get the photo op over and circulate.''

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Ziggy
      I disagree to a lot of what you say Ziggy, but I do appreciate your dry sense of humour, and it's not an ironic remark by me.

      Delete
    2. well done Ziggy/insane for another worthless paragraph !!!

      Delete
  20. Cuddle Ted seems to be angry with a lot of people.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton1 April 2017 at 13:24

    ''What should be blindingly obvious from this statement is that the Met. can float publicly, via the media, whatever fulfilment of their remit they consider fits best, ...as like as not no one outside of the Gold Group will be in a position to read and which will be archived at the records office with a 'not to be opened until...' sticker on the cover.''

    Exactly. This is further evidence( as if we needed any) of a cover up, or conspiracy( whichever you choose, it's the same thing essentially). It's also further evidence that fancy job- titles in fancy important positions in fancy uniforms are just costume. They have their remit. They are answerable to their bosses who, in turn, are answerable to theirs. The buck always stops somewhere, but not enough people realise that or question where and with whom. It descends the pyramid to the ground floor and the media servants are there waiting for it and we wait and are supposed to watch, listen and buy without examining the goods first. The press will only ever be allowed enough freedom to appear 'free' and maintain the illusion.They serve the establishment first, the rest is just crumbs and bullshit. The met and every officer in the police force swear an oath. The oath they swear is to the queen, not the people. They're no more useful than the her Governments in that area( 'Let them eat crumbs').

    That sticker has a good chance of being applied to this farce.it's time people researched that particular practice in more depth here and across the pond and not just question the high profile cases and the subsequent suspicious 'official' conclusions they apparently yielded, but challenged every last one. Politicians are public servants remember.They're answerable.If they continue to go unchallenged or unquestioned, this won't be the last time they do what they do, how they like, to anyone they choose.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anonymous1 April 2017 at 18:53

    ''well done Ziggy/insane for another worthless paragraph !!!''

    I so appreciate these occasional pearls of wit and wisdom from our paranoid friends.It restores my faith in online forums,lone nutcases and care in the community all in one swoop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. i dont think anyone really cares WHAT you say ziggy/insane, you tried it on textusas blog and got short shrift and now you are doing it on ros`s blog, im not sure why she is humouring you for so long and allowing you to constantly spout proven lies, but as its ros`s blog its ros`s rules. It does appear to be having the desired effect tho, not seen JJ post for a while and I have to agree with blacksmith, your going to drive people away...well done you, you can now go back to your paymasters and ask for that bonus.........to soon????

      Delete
    2. @ Anonymous2 April 2017 at 17:32

      it sounds as if you you troll various blogs looking to spout rubbish and ignorance.

      How many blogs/forums are you welcome on?

      Delete
  23. ZiggySawdust1 April 2017 at 21:08
    Anonymous1 April 2017 at 18:53

    ''well done Ziggy/insane for another worthless paragraph !!!''

    I so appreciate these occasional pearls of wit and wisdom from our paranoid friends.It restores my faith in online forums,lone nutcases and care in the community all in one swoop.

    Says you that has hijacked someone else is forum , you post so much on hear you clearly have nothing better to do with your life , if you feel so strongly about this case and brand everyone on hear as nut jobs etc start up your own blog .Under your own name after all you are always right,? so you have nothing to hide

    ReplyDelete
  24. Anonymous2 April 2017 at 14:59

    ''Says you that has hijacked someone else is forum , you post so much on hear you clearly have nothing better to do with your life , if you feel so strongly about this case and brand everyone on hear as nut jobs etc start up your own blog .Under your own name after all you are always right,? so you have nothing to hide''

    Oh dear( to coin a polite phrase). And there was me accusing you of paranoia.What was I thinking etc. Just a couple of little points...
    I haven't said on this or any other thread, blog, social network or the like, that i feel strongly about this or any other case. I've said it interests me, as many other things interest me. It gives my mind a workout. That's an important exercise. You should try it some time - it's never too late.As for 'better things' to do with my life, what are you talking about? I'm a stranger to you.Thank God.

    On the subject of calling 'everyone on hear' , or even here, 'nut jobs' etc, again-what are you talking about ? I've been on the receiving end of the rapier wit of a small amount of people who post here who use swear words and crack hilarious jokes about being 'mentally ill'( etc etc). In return, I've had to politely slap them down. I don't suffer fools gladly wherever i am. I made it a rule early in my life not to take shit, and, if I can't avoid it, deal with it in whatever way it takes.

    On the subject of 'hijacking'. You don't know what hijacking means do you.When you hijack something you take possession of it. This is still very much the blog of Ros. If you don't like how much I post, that isn't my problem - it's yours, I don't want it.If you don't like the points of view I talk about, again, not my problem. You need to understand how a 'discussion' works.

    On the subject of me always being 'right'. If you've scrutinised the volume of my posts, how did you miss the content ? I've said that I don't think myself, or anyone else who takes an interest in this case, or has a theory about it, is right. Nobody can be until we know the answers.By that time( which isn't likely to arrive) some will be able to look back and say that they were right-or wrong.

    I don't want to start my own blog or I would have by now. If my posts anger you as much as your drivel suggests, maybe you should-or visit an alternative blog.Or just keep your pointless criticisms to yourself and read past my name. Nothing to hide ? No, I haven't got anything that I need to hide, i just choose to hide my name because it isn't relevant and there's too many dickheads online who want to annoy.I'm sure you know what I mean. A truer definition of 'hiding' is when the likes of you mouth off with a keyboard.I see your name is 'anonymous'. Yet others are 'hiding'. Sort yourself out. I never hide when I'm offline. Then, I never get strangerrs mouth off out there. I wonder why..( I hope this was brief enough for you)

    ReplyDelete
  25. Anonymous2 April 2017 at 17:32

    ''i dont think anyone really cares WHAT you say ziggy/insane, you tried it on textusas blog and got short shrift and now you are doing it on ros`s blog''

    Here we go again. There's always one that won't flush...

    I've told you before, I have no knowledge of this 'textusa' or it's blog. I've seen the name referred to on Ros'd blog and that's about it.I have no interest in it.

    ''now you are doing it on ros`s blog,''

    What exactly am i 'doing' ?

    ''im not sure why she is humouring you for so long and allowing you to constantly spout proven lies''

    Read this slowly. Maybe Ros is 'humouring' me because she isn't interested in the irrelevant details of a complete stranger's life but is interested in somebody who challenges certain views and upholds or agrees with others and enjoys trying to stimulate debate without dickheads interrupting with thei paranoid imaginings. Paranoia is in the mind by the way, just because you're living online it doesn't mean your heads not real.By the way, genius, what are the 'proven lies' i spout ?

    ''It does appear to be having the desired effect tho, not seen JJ post for a while and I have to agree with blacksmith, your going to drive people away.''

    You imagine you know my desires now ? You really need to take some time out and examine yourself. I didn't know anyone, including Ros, when i started to post here.The Blacksmith character popped up to pontificate in my direction( and in others' too) recently, and JJ was convinced it 'knew' me too- a bit like you. He brought the insults and rants and unfounded allegations with him too- just like you.His favourite 'letter' seemed to be an exclamation mark- just l...well..you know...

    ''well done you, you can now go back to your paymasters and ask for that bonus.........to soon????''

    OK. The paranoia's now complete. My paymasters ? WT actual F are you on now ? You think I'm being paid to discuss things with other people ?Who? How much ? Why ?Some other exclamation mark fetishist come out with that crock last month.

    I'll tell you what i told , erm, 'the other one'..this blog is handled more than well enough by the hostess. It can't be easy to sustain a continuous flow at the best of times. But when it's allowed to discuss the McCann case and things connected to it, rather than angry little oiks like you wanting to imagine real people and pen their portrait, it stops.Is that your intention-to derail her threads ? That's a tragedy. I don't know why i have the audacity to laugh as i post this.

    ReplyDelete
  26. "Subtext - hate him, support them."

    or more accurately "hate them, support him"

    ReplyDelete
  27. Please, please, folks, spare me the bickering, I find it so tedious.

    Ziggy, you pride yourself on not taking bullshit, online or off, yet you spend so much time on it! Why? If I spent my time answering criticism of me, point by point, they have won, because they have monopolised all my time and attention.

    You are not winning any arguments with your long diatribes Ziggy, and in copying and pasting every slur and responding to it, you are turning readers off. There are a few basic principles that every writer and correspondent should observe when they put pen to paper, that is, if the want the reader to go on reading. Don't preach - ever! Don't alienate your readers. Don't patronise. Imagine you are on the stage and you want the audience to like you. Be nice.

    I enjoy hearing/debating alternate opinions as you know Ziggy. But I have zero interest in this petty bickering and one upmanship, it is taking everything off topic.

    And no, I am not just blaming you Ziggy, but you are showing no respect to me and my blog by insulting my readers. All I ask of those who post here is to show a bit of civility and decorum, your behaviour is uncouth - do you honestly act like that in the real world? If so, I'd be amazed if you didn't get beaten up on a daily basis.

    Whilst I fully understand things must be tough right now Ziggy, I would ask, nay demand, that you treat my blog and my readers with respect. We are entitled to hold opinions, just as you are, without being insulted.

    This is not a hate blog Ziggy. It is the side of the missing Madeleine story that the MSM are, for whatever reason, hiding from the public. And as long as the MSM keep publishing fake news stories, I will counter them with the real ones. My conscience guides me. My blog is my own search for the truth in this case Ziggy, and obviously I am not alone in this quest.

    One of the essential points, you and indeed the MSM seem to overlook when cussing 'the haters', is the fact that when the truth comes out, it will probably have headlines like 'Crime of the Century'. Of course, we're bleddy gripped! Not just because Gerry and Kate have kept our attention for 10 years (and well done for that), but because we know the real truth, not the baloney fed to us by Tony Blair, Piers Morgan and Lorraine Kelly.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton3 April 2017 at 02:11

    ''You are not winning any arguments with your long diatribes Ziggy, and in copying and pasting every slur and responding to it, you are turning readers off.''

    The difference between me and your ' seers of truth' is that i never put words into anyone's mouth than attack them for saying them.That's a bad habit and those who do it don't know when to stop.They attribute all kinds to whoever they like-evidence doesn't matter. I paste the 'slurs' ( you noticed that then-the slurs) for clarity and to ask for proof of these accusations rather than unfounded rants. I may well be turning your readers off.But they make it clear what turns them on. No apologies for that.

    ''Don't preach - ever! ''

    Me ?

    '' I have zero interest in this petty bickering and one upmanship, it is taking everything off topic.'

    Check the flow.What stopped it ?

    ''but you are showing no respect to me and my blog by insulting my readers. ''

    My responding to the slurs you spotted is insulting is it ? OK.

    ''show a bit of civility and decorum, your behaviour is uncouth - do you honestly act like that in the real world? If so, I'd be amazed if you didn't get beaten up on a daily basis. ''

    So, if i allow fools to bad mouth me it's decent.Not stupid.If i respond i should get beaten on a daily basis.I rarely meet 'warriors' out there. Just behind keyboards.

    '' We are entitled to hold opinions, just as you are, without being insulted. ''

    Again, check the flow of the thread.What was the last post before the silliness ? And who derailed it with insults ? You call my response an insult.

    ''My conscience guides me. My blog is my own search for the truth in this case Ziggy, and obviously I am not alone in this quest. ''

    Your blog is dedicated to the quest for retribution-with or without proof. Those who endorse it can say anything and talk nonsense.Those who don't have to be quiet and know their place.

    ''One of the essential points, you and indeed the MSM seem to overlook when cussing 'the haters', is the fact that when the truth comes out, it will probably have headlines like 'Crime of the Century'.''

    You don't know the truth.Nobody does.Those headlines may well come out.The story that sits beneath them might not be what the vigilantes hope for. The MSM don't matter to anyone but the government. Quoting from them plays into their game.

    ''we know the real truth, not the baloney fed to us by Tony Blair, Piers Morgan and Lorraine Kelly. ''

    They're the MSM too.They use more than newspaper. I've never known a phenomenon like this. In ten years the case is unsolved and no progress has been made.Yet tens of thousands know the truth . There's a missing piece there.

    All I've done, above this post ( and on other threads) is ask a few posters to 'put up or shut up'.In other words, if you think I'm someone from some other blog, or if you quote me with words I've never said, show me.People can abuse their right to freedom of speech of course.it's quite the fashion to support that on here.I used my right to free speech properly. I back up what i say.Big difference.

    '' Ziggy, you pride yourself on not taking bullshit''

    Yep. I do.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I fee er sum peeple hear juswant to voyse there crustations.

      Delete
    2. I can see why you have truth and retribution confused Ziggy, I expect for Gerry and Kate the two are entwined.

      In my blog, I muse Ziggy - as do my contributors. I don't 'investigate' people, I don't collect information (as if, lol) and I don't rally angry mobs. I have no time for vigilantes, my views on this are very clear - leave it to the police. And of course, the MSM and the public, should bear in mind the fall out will be traumatic for all the innocents involved.

      I challenge the lies put out by Gerry and Kate in their regular press releases and the lies of those compliant journalists who persist with the world's most unbelievable abduction story. You may be happy for our press to lie to us Ziggy, but I'm not, and from the thousands that read my blog, I'm far from alone.

      We are in a New Age of Information Ziggy, the public are rejecting fake news, and seeking out blogs such as mine for the truth. You can't stop that Ziggy, and you are as mad as Gerry and Kate if you believe you can.

      Delete
    3. ZiggySawdust @02:51

      "You don't know the truth.Nobody does."

      Somebody does. This is indisputably true.

      Oh, by the way, I know you are not Insane. And you are not going to drive me away :)

      NL

      Delete
    4. Hi NL 2 April 2017 10:56
      Your PS regarding Ziggy "Oh, by the way, I know you are not Insane. And you are not going to drive me away :)"
      well said, I agree to that.

      And thanks Rosalinda for keeping the discussion about the Maddie case alive on your blog. Some people are becoming so emotional when arguing for or against, but I see that as a sign of health.

      Delete
    5. Many thanks NL and Bjorn :) It is refreshing to correspond with others who enjoy lively debate without the sledgehammer of censorship.

      Unfortunately, Ziggy is bringing out my inner school marm - at the moment, and I am resisting the urge to strike a red pen through most of it. Not because of his opposing views, but because they are so sketchy and unfocussed.

      Unfortunately arguing with Ziggy is like arguing with a religious zealot, he is blinded by his beliefs. Kudos to him for arguing the McCanns' side, lord knows somehow needs to, but he is not making a very good job of it. It is clear he is struggling to subdue his own anger and hatred, and losing. He is openly contemptuous of myself and my contributors. It doesn't bother me, I learned long ago to take anything said on the net with a pinch of salt. But some, understandably are finding his posts offensive. From my perspective, he is sounding more and more like the long winded malcontents of Stop the Myths. Their posts are filled with spite, anger and venom, aimed at discrediting Goncalo Amaral and non believers. They all agree with each other while munching cyber popcorn. Ziggy is walking a fine line at the moment, I can pull the plug on him any time I choose!

      Delete
    6. Hi Ros@12:07

      Hi as well Bjorn & NL

      Yes I agree Ziggy can be hard work, again it's by his own admission that he hasn't read any of the books on both sides. So I find it hard to understand his logic. However Ros if you strike him off then he's won in my eyes. As much as I find him OTT in his comments but he has a right to express those comments.

      Delete
    7. @21:52

      "he has a right to express those comments."

      There's always 'Speaker's Corner'

      Delete
  29. @Anonymous 31.3 at 17:00
    @Anonymous 2.4 at 23:17

    Bill Henderson was there to tell Kate McCann that "there had been several recent cases of men getting into bed with children, but no known abductions" (© KM).

    He told Kate this before she was taken off for questioning on May 4, 2007. Kate was questioned in the presence of Gerry McCann because Gerry was extremely worried about Kate’s psychological state.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have serious doubts about the story that PDL 'had several recent cases of men getting into bed with children'. In 2007, my mother and I were glued to the McCann Sky News Channel. Absolutely nothing was too trivial to report and PDL was packed with the world's crime reporters - they covered everything. Yet in all that unprecedented scramble for news, not one of them mentioned those 'recent cases of men getting into bed with children'.

      This myth came out in 2011, via Kate's book. Why the delay with a story that backed up the abduction? It came to light again via Operation Grange bizarrely, who in their official statement asked that journalists respect the 'victims' of these alleged crimes by not investigating or reporting on them.

      And yes indeed, 09:39, if evidence were needed of kid glove treatment, or even perverting the course of justice, Gerry sat behind Kate squeezing her shoulder as she was interviewed on 4th May 2007 is a prime example.

      How different might the outcome of this case have been if the Police had interviewed Kate on her own? How was it even possible for a prime suspect (and parents must always be first suspects) to be interviewed in the presence of the other prime suspect? I can't imagine it is common police practice, so where did the order to allow it come from?

      Delete
    2. "This myth came out in 2011, via Kate's book. Why the delay with a story that backed up the abduction? It came to light again via Operation Grange bizarrely"

      Weren't the two vehicles ('madeleine' and Operation Grange) rolled out in the same year?

      Anyway, something of a test resembling a simultaneous equation can be applied to Grange and its predecessor (Operation Task).

      Suppose we take the view that everything which might be considered questionable prior to the McCanns (and the British police) returning home in 2008 was genuinely nothing more than the result of unfortunate coincidence, for which there would be an 'entirely innocent explanation', to coin a phrase.

      Fair enough. People were making decisions 'on the fly', it was a 'work in progress', dealing with the unknown/the unforeseen and all that.

      Operation Grange on the other hand was launched three years later, after all the data had been gathered and examined; something Grange, we are told, did all over again, for completeness.

      Why then was the early evidence set aside, new suspects introduced and a witness apparently fabricated? (just three matters which point to the dubiousness of the undertaking).

      Could any of this have been at the behest of the Gold Group, who drew up the original 'abduction only' remit - the same Gold Group which had assumed overall responsibility for Operation Task in 2007?

      If Grange is 'flakey'...

      All that glitters is NOT gold.

      Delete
    3. I've never heard of the Gold Group 12:09, google throws up an employment agency, so do explain.

      There is no evidence that early evidence has been set aside 12:09. On the contrary, the most public display we have seen from Operation Grange was their digging up of the immediate areas surrounding Apartment 5A. And apart from DCI Redwood saying Madeleine may be alive or dead, he also said one line is that she may not have been alive when she left the apartment. And we all know where that lead came from. Woof.

      I tend to think the early work of Operation Grange was to satisfy the parents demands that every lead, no matter how tenuous had to be fully investigated before they were called in. It's a long way to go about solving a crime, but there's nothing normal about this one.

      Delete
    4. Rosalinda 14:28

      "I've never heard of the Gold Group"

      Operation Task:

      http://library.college.police.uk/docs/npia/Strategic-debrief-operation-task-2009.pdf

      "The Gold Group: the CPS, the FCO, the Home Office, ACPO, CEOP, the Metropolitan Police Service, NPIA, SIO

      "A national response strategy was developed by this group Objectives: endeavour to secure the safe recovery of Madeleine.

      "Secure and preserve evidence which may assist in the investigation of her abduction and the prosecution of those responsible".


      Operation Grange (extract from the 'remit'):

      "The ‘investigative review’ will be conducted with transparency, openness and thoroughness.

      "The work will be overseen through the Gold Group management structure, which will also manage the central relationships with other key stakeholders and provide continuing oversight and direction to the investigative remit"

      Rosalinda: "There is no evidence that early evidence has been set aside"

      Goncalo Amaral: "The English can always present the conclusions to which they themselves arrived in 2007. Because they know. They have the evidence of what happened - they don't need to investigate anything. All this is a mere show off".

      "the most public display we have seen from Operation Grange was their digging up of the immediate areas surrounding Apartment 5A."

      Not those singled out for attention by Mark Harrison however.

      "DCI Redwood saying...that she (Madeleine) may not have been alive when she left the apartment. And we all know where that lead came from."

      Do we? I wouldn't presume.

      "It's a long way to go about solving a crime"

      Correction: It's the wrong way...

      Delete
  30. Anonymous3 April 2017 at 12:09

    Indeed.

    Astute.

    Mazel tov!

    ReplyDelete
  31. The PJ re the sex abuses.
    https://joana-morais.blogspot.co.uk/2014/11/dna-clears-crucial-suspect-in-maddie.html

    ReplyDelete
  32. http://portugalresident.com/%E2%80%98here-i-feel-i-am-making-a-real-difference%E2%80%99

    December 15, 2005

    "Bill Henderson: My last job, from 2001-2005 was as director for the Middle East and Africa at UK Trade and Investment, the trade arm of the Foreign Office in London. This job included responsibility for co-ordinating the efforts of British business to take part in the reconstruction of post-war Iraq. I visited Baghdad in 2003, after the war ended, which was a fascinating experience.

    [...]

    R: What has been the greatest challenge of your career to date?

    BH: When I served as the press attaché at the Madrid Embassy in the late 1980s I was given the challenge of organising the media aspects of a state visit to Spain from Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. This involved much planning and preparation, particularly over issues such as security and press access. It was an unforgettable experience."

    ReplyDelete
  33. John Buck, FCO Director for Iraq, September 2003-July 2004
    My roles and responsibilities in relation to Iraq

    "I was Head of Public Diplomacy in 2003, as the Iraq conflict was approaching. In February 2003 the Permanent Undersecretary asked me to take over the Government Communication and Information Centre (CIC), a Unit staffed largely by members of the Government Information Service seconded from different Whitehall Ministries, and which had recently produced the second Iraq dossier. The CIC was situated in the FCO but worked closely with Alastair Campbell at No 10. During the conflict the CIC coordinated ministerial engagement with the media. On the eve of the conflict, by which time the Unit had doubled in size to 20
    or so staff, we absorbed seconded staff from one or two other coalition governments, notably the USA, to try to ensure broader coordination of media engagement".

    ReplyDelete
  34. John Buck, FCO Director for Iraq, September 2003-July 2004

    “We made considerable effort during the autumn of 2003 to generate policing contributions from other countries, both within and beyond the coalition. We agreed with the US that the UK would focus on EU partners, accession countries, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa. I chaired a conference attended by these countries, as well as the relevant Assistant Deputy Secretary in the US State Department, in London in late October, with Paul Kernaghan of ACPO playing a key role. Our assumption was that most countries, particularly nonCoalition members, would find it easier to supply trainers for the Jordan project, which was the key focus of the conference. The conference was scheduled in advance of the Madrid Donors Conference so that those unwilling to make immediate commitments might do so in or following Madrid. Canada, Poland and the Czech Republic pledged contributions in London. Austria and, I think, one or two other countries did so at or after Madrid, following further lobbying in capitals. Separately, the Danes were already involved in training in Basra and there had been a contingent of Italian carabinieri from the early stages of the post conflict period, as well as a contingent of Portuguese GNR (National Republican Guard, similar in concept to the Italian carabinieri).

    One difficulty was that a number of countries expressed an interest in helping, but wished to do so outside the plans and structure agreed by the CPA. This was particularly true of the French and Germans, who saw civilian policing as a relatively uncontroversial way of engaging with reconstruction efforts, but had difficulties of politics and principle with any suggestion that their personnel would be under CPA authority. The French offered to train Iraqi police in Paris – a proposal that was never taken up. More seriously, the Germans offered to provide trainers for a project in Abu Dhabi, with possible Egyptian participation. This had grown out of visits by Chancellor Schröder to both countries and thereafter became a politically driven priority for the Germans.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is this...a competition to see who can C/P the longest quote?

      Buck and Hendersons' proximity to the inner sanctum during Blair's reign at No.10 is a pertinent consideration. I'm not sure the same can be said of matters concerning the 'coalition of the willing' (which is why I terminated my extract).

      That is not to say that these statements do not make for interesting reading per se.

      Delete