Sunday 17 September 2017

McCANNS .V. FREEDOM OF SPEECH

Of all the injustices in the case of missing Madeleine McCann, the one that outraged me the most (and outrages me still), is the parents' demand that only their side of the story can be legally published and distributed.  And it outraged me that they embarked on a vendetta, not only to silence the former detective who searched for their daughter, but to destroy his life. 

Let's clear up one of the nasty myths created by Team McCann.  And I refer specifically to those witnesses for the team, who travelled to Lisbon to cuss a book they claimed not to have read because it is beneath them.  Weird how McCann supporters use NOT reading as a sign of their moral and intellectual superiority.  So let me set them straight.

Goncalo Amaral's book The Truth of the Lie, is not filled with childish playground insults, nor is it filled with cold, hard, brutal allegations.  GA recounts the investigation not only as a detective, but as a compassionate human being.  Goncalo is much too talented a writer, and of course legally aware (he has a Law degree) to write the kind of garbage the McCanns imply, it is obvious from page 1, that he is a gentleman and a scholar.  If even one of the McCanns' allegations were true, why do they not produce the offensive lines as evidence?

But I'm going to take a big auld left of left turn here, and move onto Freedom of Speech, because once again my blog is bombarded by those issuing warnings and threats to myself and John Blacksmith to curb our language.  Well actually I'm not sure my turn is left of left, because being politically correct is where I and the Labour Party part company.  I demand the right to offend!  And just like anyone who practices that right, I will reap the consequences.   

I'm afraid I have zero sympathy for those who claim to be mortally wounded by words.  Especially those privileged white middle classes, who want to enjoy their privileges without being criticised, eg. politicians and former suspects.  For those having their homes repossessed and queuing at foodbanks, a neighbour calling them a auld trollop is the least of their worries.  Karen Matthews for example, had she been a bit brighter and had shed loads of money, could have sued every UK tabloid.  True, she only had 3 weeks, but Gerry and Kate were lawyered up and raking it in by Day 3.  Who knows what the outcome would have been if she had had several million at her disposal? 

But this is about Freedom of Speech.  Must stay focused!  I am passionately opposed to those who would go through dictionaries with a black pen, believing that if certain words and phrases are redacted, we would all live happily ever after.  Oblivious to the fact that forcing people to be politically correct, under duress, leaves a lot of tensions simmering. Just thought, I'd throw that in.

The thing is, writers, artists, poets, musicians have been dodging censors for centuries.  They can and do find ways and means to get the message through. Happily those doing the censoring have always been far too ignorant to spot them.  But while I'm freestyling, I get away with it, because I am one of those fuzzy liberals who won't commit to anything.  If Jim Gamble gets me in the dock, my first response will likely be, 'Is a cup really a cup?'

Whether I stumbled into it, or the fickle finger of fate intervened, this case became a personal battle for me against the backdoor way in which Gerry and Kate have used the fate of their child, to add further to the arguments of those who would strike black lines through the English language.  As if obliterating words will obliterate everything those words stood for.  Those dumb enough to release their inner psychopath online, will receive exactly the same treatment they would in the real world.  Some will challenge them, some will support them, but most will shun them.  The extreme paranoids will lock themselves away in panic rooms, which given their sensitive natures may be the best place for them.  My own blog demonstrates the power of laissez faire, it has found it's own level, the psychos have upped their game or crawled back under a stone.  The sane are winning, I hasten to add!

Whilst harsh words can indeed cause any one of us to go ouch, so what?  As Marx said, (Groucho, not Karl), If you don't like those views, I've got plenty of others.  I interpret that as, if those ones offended you, wait til you see what's coming next.  Ban words, ban phrases, ban views, and others will replace them, language is a living, constantly growing organism, it evolves as we do.  Those wielding black pens, might just as well be wielding quills and inkpots for all the effect they will have on the 21st century dictionary, regular, urban or otherwise. 

Ninety nine percent of us, don't sue people who offend us, not just because it is a pathetic waste of money, but because we can't be arsed.   Suing people for financial damages is the preserve of the wealthy, funds have never been available, even via Legal Aid, for the impoverished to make such claims.  While the well heeled offended battle it out in the Courts, the rest of us couldn't give a monkeys, though we might tune in for the juicy bits.  A successful libel action has never turned anyone into a hero, in most cases it has left them reviled.  Even the fabulous and much loved Oscar Wilde, managed to turn the public against him.

No-one needs a Court of Law to fight their case or defend themselves.  In this age of rapidly growing technology, we all have, at our fingertips, the means to put forward our side of the argument.  The McCanns especially, who have contact lists full to bursting.  But they don't even need that, the media world is now a level playing field (which is why I also feel I need to up my game lol), they can put out blogs just as I do, they can contribute to their Facebook page, as themselves, they can speak to the press directly, not through a source or a spokesman.  They can show their real sides to the world, just as GA has, and let the world judge for themselves. 

Even with all the legal victories and financial awards the McCanns received in the early days, and with Carter Ruck on constant watch, the parents' reputations are more damaged than they ever were.  Ergo, the idea that a libel win against Goncalo Amaral will repair their reputations is ludicrous, with every libel claim they have made, suspicion of them escalates. 

It clearly crucifies Kate and Gerry to have this cloud of suspicion hanging over them, but they have always had the power to remove it.  As the Portuguese archiving report stated, they lost the opportunity to prove their innocence.  Had they returned to PDL for a reconstruction and answered all the police questions, they could have been ruled out from the start and we wouldn't all be here 10 years on.  That cloud of suspicion didn't begin with Goncalo Amaral, it began with their own weird behaviour and the circus and money spinning industry they created out of their daughter's disappearance.  GA's side of the story wasn't heard until much, much later. 

Punishing Goncalo Amaral, does nothing to find the missing child, nothing to repair their reputations, and nothing to convince the public they are nice people. Honest.  They weren't asking for GA to be jailed (though that would have been a nice bonus for them), they were asking for the proceeds of book, not filing their claim until a year later when the royalties had mounted up.  The punishment they wanted, was for him to be stripped of all his financial assets, and Portuguese Law, such as it is, immediately froze the royalties from his book, the title deeds of his family home and all his earnings which left him unable to defend himself while the McCanns pursued him relentlessly. 

For me it is the cruel streak that runs through this claim of Gerry and Kate's, this hounding of the former detective, is premeditated, deliberate, and intended to bring pain and distress.  This isn't the result of the runaway train, or moments of madness, they need Goncalo Amaral to feel pain in order for them to feel better.  That isn't noble, it's not even moral. 

The McCanns appeal to the European Court won't fare any better than their appeals in Portugal.  By their very nature, these Courts have to be bang up to the minute, unlike the crusty old wig bedecked British Judges, who have to blow the dust off ancient text books.  The world has changed since the McCanns claim began, the ancient elite no longer run the show.  A policeman has the same rights as a doctor.  Despite being stripped of all his assets, Goncal Amaral could fight back, because the internet made his plight known, and the public responded generously. 

The McCanns told their side Madeleine, in their own words, Goncalo Amaral told his, The Truth of the Lie in his own, (far more eloquent) words.  How can one be legal and the other not?  Or should Madeleine be banned too, because they didn't prove Madeleine was abducted, along with every book in the crime section that mentions crimes not proven?  Bear in mind, this would include their very own Summers and Swan. Where does it end? 

Whilst others have got on with their lives, Gerry and Kate are still claiming to be victims.  Fair enough, their choice.  But they still want new Laws to be introduced, that would enable them to sue more people.  The thrust of their legal argument with GA can be summed up in two words. Without proof.  It is with those two words that they have GA and the entire UK media by the short and curlies.  They seem to have taken over from the previous two word chant, 'no evidence'. 

Given my absolute abhorrence for the word 'Ban', (censor comes a close second), this war on Goncalo Amaral (bless him), is a war on Freedom of Speech.  The McCanns have, without any laws being passed, been successful in preventing the publication of The Truth of the Lie in the UK for over 9 years.  How fecking antiquated are we, that two people, can have that amount of power, simply because they have the best lawyers money can buy?  Why should a former detective be prevented from earning a living as a writer? 

In some bizarro world where the McCanns win, detectives, as an entire profession, will be forbidden, by Law from writing their memoirs - the cads!  Former suspects meanwhile, can fill their boots.  Punishing GA will send a message to detectives everywhere (especially those close to them), that the Good Lord will rain down upon them with great anger and furious vengeance, should they get a tempting offer from Rupert Murdoch. 

Punishing Goncalo Amaral does nothing to find the missing Madeleine, or even to commemorate her.  The initial argument that 'no-one would look for her if they believed she was dead' is now moot.  After the Scotland Yard digs in PDL (far more in your face than GA's book), is anyone still looking for a live Madeleine?  Saying Madeleine is dead without evidence, should not be a punishable offence in the Civil Court, the Criminal Court or the real world. 

Most people are offended every day by what others say about them, they are outraged, hurt, distressed, etc, for a short while, but then they move on.  They don't spend the rest of their lives seeking vengeance and retribution. At what point will someone say 'yep, this is truly insane'.  It's been 9 years ffs, and their child is still missing.  Why are they putting themselves through this, why are they putting their families through it?  They already face ruinous legal costs, still unknown, why incur more?  Now they have started the clock, the minutes and hours are notching up as chargeable units for lawyers and spin doctors.  Their motives are grimy, but they are what they are.  As for their family and friends, wtf?  Especially those who travelled to Lisbon with the intention of seeing an innocent punished.  May their Gods forgive them. 

Shouldn't someone close be saying that within the next few months, that they might need high priced lawyers, who specialise in something other than libel?  I'm trying to be tactful here, but the investigations by the Portuguese and British police, might leave them with an urgent need for, err, say, extradition lawyers?  If the circumstances change from a Civil Court to a Criminal Court, the libel won't matter one iota.  Ergo, aren't they putting their eggs in the wrong basket.  Just saying. 

229 comments:

  1. The reason that the McCanns can publish their 'side' of the 'story' is because it can't, nor can they be, proven wrong by hard evidence to say that their side of the story is wrong.The reason they challenge Amaral's allegations published within his book is because his allegations don't have that luxury. You might need to play down the allegations but it's hard to sound well balanced if you want to advance the argument that decalring somebody lied about the death of their own child, hid her body, then later buried it while telling the world and the police that she had been abducted. Especially in light of the fact that other police officers have announced that those on the receiving end of the allegations are not being considered as suspects and no evidence recovered from the scene of the crime supports the allegations.I know that a lot of people are saying 'yeah, the police say that, but it doesn't mean they mean it'.I think ten years says they mean it.Don't you ?

    Your stand on free speech is commendable but, at the same time, reckless. You need to move with the times.The world is a lot faster these days and a lot more people are running about on it.Murders and crimes are commonplace whereas once upon a time they were isolated headlines.Anger is driving people in all directions for many reasons. An awful lot of people feel the need to free themselves from whichever boot has been holding them down by the neck and lash out just for some parity.That's why an awful lot have taken advantage of the internet's 'anonymity' facility to do so.It's bringing out all kinds of demons . That needs curtailing. If demons and 'inner psychopaths' are allowed carte blanche to 'get it all out' with no consideration of possible consequences to others then anarchy reigns. If authors of fiction or poets want to enjoy unfettered freedom of speech that's fine.Nobody gives a shit about that anyway - it's fiction and / or opinion.

    You're right, punishing( or silencing) Amaral does nothing to find Madeleine.Then neither does writing -then promoting- a book of allegations about the author's idea of a hidden truth.

    The solving of the case, or exposure of any behind-the-scenes conspiring to protect somebody will determine whether or not Amaral's book is wasted paper or evidence of a huge cover up to conceal a crime and to oust him from his job so he couldn't reveal it.

    It's that simple, really.

    VT

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The evidence for an abduction is non-existent. However, the evidence the McCanns were involved in their daughter's disappearance is overwhelming. I understand Amaral's book was based on the police investigation. However, Kate's book was what the McCanns say happened. No evidence to support it whatsoever. Although I read madeleine I haven't actually read Amaral's book as I don't need him to tell me the McCanns are involved with their daughter's disappearance. That is blatantly obvious. Police officers can say the McCanns are not suspects as much as they like, but the fact remains the Portuguese Supreme Court reminded us in January of this year that the McCanns have never been ruled out of involvement in Madeleine's disappearance. Their voice counts

      Delete
  2. To outraged Ros.

    Oh dear how annoyed you sound. Last week the gloves came off and now you demand the right to insult whilst remaining fuzzy and laissez faire.

    You say "Whilst others have got on with their lives" - well you haven't got on with your life and moved on have you? You are still here spouting your hatred of the Mccanns. The Mccanns have a missing daughter.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whilst others have got on with their lives, refers to the other victims of the press who came forward for the Leveson Inquiry.

      I too have got on with my life. I am not involved in a decade old legal action, and looking to extend it by another 5 years.

      The McCanns 10 years on, are focussed on punishing the former detective, not finding their missing daughter. That's f*cked up in anyone's book.

      Delete
    2. ''The McCanns 10 years on, are focussed on punishing the former detective, not finding their missing daughter. That's f*cked up in anyone's book.''

      A sweeping statement. Dare anyone ask you to provide evidence of what it claims ? Would it be worth it ? It sounds like your opinion more than anything.
      To use an analogy, if you had been assaulted, or your house had been burgled, you would have called the police in .It's their duty after that to conduct some investigations and try to apprehend the culprit or culprits. If, a few weeks later, nothing has come of it and a friend or neighbour asks you why you aren't looking too, what would your answer be ?

      The 'punishing' ( as you call it) of a former detective is something they have to do as it isn't a police matter(apparently).His allegations about them are taken by them as unfounded and, therefore, untrue unless he can prove their validity beyond that of mere suspicion. The allegations being made so public have the potential to ruin their reputation and torment them and their families.

      VT

      Delete
    3. If I had been assaulted or my house had been burgled, I wouldn't have set up a parallel investigation of my own and called the police fucking tossers. I also wouldn't have announced to the world that I would leave no stone unturned. Ergo, I would not have to explain to a friend or neighbour why I wasn't looking for the assailant or burglar. I would have trusted the police, I wouldn't have tried to replace them with my own investigators.

      The punishing of the former detective is SOMETHING THEY HAVE TO DO ????? (because the police won't). They don't HAVE TO punish him, they could walk away. Maybe turn the other cheek as their catholic religion teaches them.

      As for the allegations (what allegations?) being made so public have the potential to ruin their reputation........ They ruined their own reputations! And long before Goncalo Amaral's book was published, I might add.

      Do you have any idea of how ridiculous your last sentence sounds? More has been written about Madeleine McCann than any other missing child or person. GA's book, is now but a drop in the ocean. I don't know how any Court could see the McCanns need to punish Goncalo Amaral as anything other than very personal, and very spiteful. And that's not what a Court of Human Rights is about.

      Delete
    4. '' I don't know how any Court could see the McCanns need to punish Goncalo Amaral as anything other than very personal, and very spiteful''

      Whereas accusing two parents of hiding then burying the body of their child is what ?

      He's implying that they are killers (at worst), or of being aware that their child was dead, who then buried their child in an unmarked grave while misleading the police and public.He hasn't backed that up, nor has anyone else in the many years that have passed since.

      Your answer to the question I posed in the analogy I made isn't rational. You seem to have delibeartely ignored the point . It would seem you can't let go of theat dark anger that's gripped you far too tightly.

      ''As for the allegations (what allegations?) being made so public have the potential to ruin their reputation........ They ruined their own reputations!'

      What allegations ? The allegations that they'd lied to the police, hid the body of their child, buried the body of their child and conspired with their group of friends to fake an abduction. How could you forget those ?

      Claiming that their child had been abducted and expressing anger at the early mistakes made in the investigation didn't ruin their reputations. Public hunger for scandal, gossip and a need to play detective-from-distance ruined their reputation. Amaral's book was the fuel to the wildfire which has since has spread far beyond control. It doesn't seem to have panicked the two police forces into action though.

      ''Do you have any idea of how ridiculous your last sentence sounds?''

      No.Because it doesn't.

      VT

      Delete
  3. "Karen Matthews for example, had she been a bit brighter and had shed loads of money, could have sued every UK tabloid."

    For what exactly?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ros says:

    " As the Portuguese archiving report stated, they lost the opportunity to prove their innocence. Had they returned to PDL for a reconstruction and answered all the police questions, they could have been ruled out from the start and we wouldn't all be here 10 years on."
    -----------------------------------------

    That is exactly the reason they didn't return for the reconstruction - it was nothing to do with the search for what happened to Madeleine, it was for the Police to try to find evidence against the Mccanns.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is that why they didn't appear in the Scotland Yard reconstruction too?

      Delete
    2. @ Ros 10:41

      I have no idea if they were asked to take part in the Crimewatch programme - is there some implication in your question?

      Delete
    3. You can tell when someone's desperate by how they clutch at straws.What are you desperate for, Ros, as an 'impartial observer just musing' ? Where's that 'I welcome other views' thing gone. Or wasn't that sincere.

      Delete
    4. Why would I be desperate?

      I'm not personally involved in this 16:43 - whatever the outcome is makes not one iota of difference to me.

      Delete
    5. @ Ros 18:27

      I suggest you read back through your numerous comments - it is obvious that you have made it personal. Do you forget "the Mccanns ruined me" comments that you posted on forums and here?

      Delete
    6. Let me explain 18:55. It is personal in that I will defend to the death, my name and reputation. I am not doing it in a snidey way, or via lawyers, I'm doing it on an open mike platform.

      I'm not a hater, I'm not a troll, and I'm not an evil ghoul feasting off a family's tragedy. I am a regular person, a writer struggling to make a living, having been vilified on social media.

      Oh, and I'm also someone who happens to believe in Freedom of Speech, and indeed, Thought.

      Now the 'personal' in my previous post, referred to the fact that I am not seeking vengeance, nor do I 'hate' Gerry and Kate. My interest is academic, behavioural science if you like, I'm a people watcher, most writers are. If I just wanted to bitch, I could have done so long ago, but it's not style, but I'll leave that to the amateurs and the Sun journalists.

      As I have said on my blog, many times, I have no interest in the punishment side of crime. I've never had the heart to punish anyone, because I am usually weeping at the bigger picture.

      I try not forget the very real people who are affected by this tragedy, some of whom, I suspect read here. Yes, sometimes my words to them are harsh, but they are well thought out. Shrouding everything with dishonesty to make people feel better, is wrong on every level.

      Delete
    7. @ Ros 12:35
      "I am a regular person, a writer struggling to make a living, having been vilified on social media."

      Are you saying that vilification on social media has made you struggle with your writing?

      Delete
  5. Kate McCann (‘madeleine’):
    [action against the press]

    “It’s just a shame we had to do it at all, and if the media had listened to us, to Angus, Justine, Clarence and to the chief constable of Leicestershire police, it could have been avoided.”

    ----------

    ‘Pals of Kate and Gerry and ‘the family pal’ (July 2017):

    ‘Pals of Kate and Gerry have said Goncalo Amaral "has won once and for all" because they don't have the "time, energy or funding" to take him to the highest court in the land.’

    ‘The family pal said: “Realistically a European Court appeal was never going to succeed plus it would be too expensive to launch. It seems Mr Amaral, regrettably, has won once and for all. The fight is finally over.’

    ----------

    Clarence Mitchell and Gerry McCann (September 2017):

    "Family spokesman Clarence Mitchell told MailOnline: 'I can confirm that Kate and Gerry McCann’s Portuguese lawyers lodged an appeal application in the Amaral case with the European Court of Human Rights in July of this year."

    "Mr McCann added that it was important to challenge Mr Amaral in the European courts on behalf of the wider family, including his children."

    ----------

    The ‘Tapas Seven’:

    ----------

    ReplyDelete
  6. "Charles Bronson is suing Richard Madeley after the Good Morning Britain host wrongly said he attacked a prison governor in 2016"

    According to Ros he must have shed loads/millions of money to be able to do that.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Ros
    You summed the Mcs and their machinations up nicely. Amaral and his team are the Mcs nemesis, the only ones who can exact justice upon them and end the Mc circus. The lengths and efforts the Mcs have gone to destroy Amaral well exceed any search they should have have energised towards finding their child. They have always sought public approbation yet engineered more suspicion and vilification through their over zealous litigious undertakings utilising money begged from the public who thought they were donating towards a search for a missing child. They remain the architects of their own opprobrium.
    -
    SixYearsInAComaman

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The world was astonished at the huge campaign Gerry and Kate launched within hours of their daughter's disappearance SYIACM (nice to see ya btw), it was like nothing the world had ever seen before, but we accepted it, because it was the dawn of the internet, and the parents were to be commended for taking advantage of it.

      But it was the highly groomed appearances, the daily photo calls and press briefings, the opening of an online shop, the patenting of Madeleine's name and the urgent need to raise millions. The hundreds of interviews and the lack of emotion. And I mean real emotion, not just a whiney voice. For most of us, just a name, or a word, or a song that brings back a memory, can reduce us to a weeping, quivering, heap. Real crying, is when your face crumples, and your nose runs and you just don't care. And I'm not ashamed to say, when my dear old mum departed this world, she was laughing, because I was wearing odd earrings.

      Mothers all over the world watched Kate carefully. Not because they wanted criticise or find fault, but because they wanted to reach out to her, to embrace her in the same way, as they would for any grieving mother. But there wasn't anything there to empathise with. Kate didn't act as we would have.

      The McCanns and their supporters can condemn that all they like, but it is as it is. Human nature. If you cannot empathise, it creates a feeling of the unheimlich, it unsettles us, creates suspicion. Whether that is Kate's real character, or one she has created for the public, it is not endearing.

      Kate's mother condemned the public by saying they couldn't take to Kate, because she was slim, pretty and successful. Yeh, that helped. First rule of showbiz, never throw rotting vegetables at your audience.

      I think if there were a graph on how suspicion around the parents has gone up or down, it would have peaked in the mid to late summer of 2007, reaching a high when they were made arguidoes.

      I don't really think it would have gone down after that, maybe a light dip when the PJ closed their file, then peaked still further after the release of the PJ files and the publication of GA's book.

      Since then of course, with the Scotland Yard investigation, the line must have gone off the scale. It will never return to that all time low of May/June 2007. If the above graph were used, the loss of reputation argument would be moot.

      Delete
    2. ''I think if there were a graph on how suspicion around the parents has gone up or down, it would have peaked in the mid to late summer of 2007, reaching a high when they were made arguidoes.''

      Ten years later we can see how useful that graph was.

      All the talk about 'acts' and 'showbiz' - what's that about ? This is real life. You, me, or anyone can't say how we would behave in circumstances so alien to us .It's easy to sit at a computer with a glass of something we shouldn't really be drinking and type in such a blase way about it. The 'if that was me' talk is no use.It's a guess at best. But then most of the assumptions typed about the case are. It's all very well for the faithful to shift the mountain of suspicion they've created themselves onto the McCanns, but all it is in reality is self-justification to avoid feeling pangs of guilt. The McCanns didn't create suspicion. They might have caused others to be suspicious but there's a subtle difference.Nobody can give a reliable character analysis of a stranger and shouldn't profess to be able to. They can comment on how attractive KM is, but that's superficial and unimportant.

      ''
      The McCanns and their supporters can condemn that all they like, but it is as it is. Human nature. If you cannot empathise, it creates a feeling of the unheimlich, it unsettles us, creates suspicion. Whether that is Kate's real character, or one she has created for the public, it is not endearing. ''

      If you cannot empathise, you shouldn't pretend that you can. Knowing the dictionary definition of empathy isn't the same.People eventually spot it.I watched all the early press conferences and appearances as you did.I was suspicious initially.But I'm often suspicious of them after seeing so many 'devastated' parents or spouses later arrested for the crime.That was informing my observation.Later on-about a year- I looked at it all again.None of the TV appearances were spontaneous. None were of unguarded on-the-spot parents. It was clear that they must have done their crying in private and wanted to make the most of appeals. Bear in mind that their professions rely often on emotional detachment and calmness. This has been what the haters call the 'act' . It's where the snipes about the 'coldness' and ''wicked' appearances were born. It became a big piece of the online jigsaw puzzle to add to the rest; subjective interpretations and suspicion . That list has been too long for too long. Where has it led to ? Repetition and a lot of twisting and straining to re-interpret quotes and other minutiae in the hope of a Eureka moment. It's too late for those. It's a dead horse.

      VT

      Delete
    3. Lovely piece of pure Mccann hate there Ros 19:54 - you must be very proud of your achievements over the last 10 years - your in depth research is astounding.

      Delete
    4. Part II

      For fear of boring you, I'm on a roll SYIACM, I could of course list a zillion reasons why the behaviour of Gerry and Kate aroused EVERYONE's suspicion (including the PJ), but it really only boils down to one thing.

      Gerry and Kate have never reached that developmental stage, that rite of passage, that light bulb moment, that crossover from child to adult. That realisation that YOU ALONE are responsible for your own actions. The life you have, is the life you have chosen. It's ludicrous to blame other people, they didn't make the decisions, you did. Of course, there are some who prefer (it's their choice)to blame all this misfortune on others. If only.. if only. Blaming others absolves them of blame, and here we get back to Gerry and Kate.

      If only Goncalo Amaral had been a better cop, Madeleine would be here now. This steers everyone away from their terrible decision to leave the toddlers on their own. So convincing was the McCanns' denouncement of the Portuguese Police, that talk how hosts the world over refer to the original investigation as a shambles.

      For Gerry and Kate, blaming someone else is their leit motif. They are eternal victims. No-one ever said to them ffs get over it. And I don't mean the loss of their daughter, I mean their ridiculous demands for pistols at dawn for a decade old 'offence' (to them), that no-one cares about.

      Not only do Gerry and Kate blame the Portuguese police but they also blame the Portuguese people. The pro-McCann trolls use every opportunity to smear the Algarve as some sort of hang out for perverts.

      The blame the Press, everywhere, if only they would listen to their office press releases and official spokesmen and sources. But of course they have them tamed with the constant threat of Carter Ruck.

      The McCanns were of course amply rewarded by the British Media, but that wasn't enough. Once Leverson began, Gerry and Kate got another opportunity to tell the world how much they had been victimised.

      The internet, they have not yet been able to conquer, though they have had a good try. The #McCann hashtag, is probably the most vindictive and mawkish example of internet trolling, for interested parties.

      I feel a bit sad for Gerry and Kate that they see everyone as the enemy, they have a skew whiff, view of the world, I'm guessing childhoods wrapped in cotton wool. Their parents' started their snooty little ways, by telling them how superior they were to everyone else. If something goes wrong, it can't possibly be their fault.

      Gerry and Kate are among that small, or possibly even large group, who have not yet reached that level of self awareness where they accept responsibility for their own actions. The chances are, they never will, that happens sometimes. Often.

      Delete
    5. Err, most of us Ziggy, especially when we get to a certain age, know exactly how we would act in a tragic situation. We've lived it, seen it, felt it, and doctors, at the very least, have observed it.

      The creepy automatons Gerry and Kate have created for their public statements, have no lifelike qualities that are relatable to ordinary people. How do you not get that?

      On the empathy front, over empathising is one of the triggers and symptoms of manic depression Ziggy, we struggle to switch it off, it crucifies us. But you wouldn't understand.

      I see in your final paragraph you are back to 'haters' Ziggy. That all encompassing description of those who don't believe the abduction story.

      The thing is, now we are past all the hysteria and the furore of the early years, the word 'haters' sounds a bit juvenile. Name calling can only take you so far, eventually the mob will want substance.

      You can cite all the other cases you like Ziggy, and you didn't, but most of use can distinguish between real and pretend, or to be kind, robotically controlled, grief. And we don't
      need a PhD in lying and body language to do it. It's an ability held by most primates, all part of the old survival instinct.

      The odd behaviour, like the Fund and Smithman, is all part of the narrative Ziggy. You can't rule it out so we talk about Goncalo Amaral all the time.

      And btw, Ziggy, don't push your luck, as you know I only have a certain amount of tolerance for rudeness and disrespect.

      Delete
    6. ''The creepy automatons Gerry and Kate have created for their public statements, have no lifelike qualities that are relatable to ordinary people. How do you not get that?''

      As one of those 'ordinary' people'i don't have any hang ups about class. This is a crime under discussion. You seem to be of a mind that prison is for plebs and plebs alone. It isn't.And doctors are not of the top tier of the social strata. If they commit crimes the pay like anyone else. I think 'creepy automatons' is in the the of the beholder. If you're waiting for them to break out into laughter so you can start a thread about that, you'll be waiting a fair while.How would you 'act' or appear if your child was there one minute then gone for what looks like forever the next ?

      It's possible to disagree with the abduction story and hate nobody. If the abduction story is so obvioulsy fake and it builds a rage up inside someone, shouldn't they direct it at gullible detectives ? How come they can't distinguish between 'real and pretend' ?

      The 'narrative' is old now.And as for rudeness and disrespect..

      Delete
    7. I didn't mention class Ziggy. Behaving like an automaton isn't a class issue. And I'm not talking about them breaking into laughter, where's that come from? Isn't it more likely they would break into tears?

      I know it's possible to disagree with the abduction story and hate nobody. That is in fact how must of us feel because we are not personally involved. This idea of 'hate' comes from you Ziggy.

      Delete
    8. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton18 September 2017 at 21:57

      ''Look up 'muse' 21:24.''


      Muse :

      verb (used without object), mused, musing.

      1 -to think or meditate in silence, as on some subject.

      2-Archaic. to gaze meditatively or wonderingly.

      Hate / Hatred

      Hatred or hate is a deep and extreme emotional dislike. It can be directed against individuals, groups, entities, objects, behaviors, or ideas. Hatred is often associated with feelings of anger, disgust and a disposition towards hostility.

      In psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud defined hate as an ego state that wishes to destroy the source of its unhappiness..

      Maybe you could post another poll : ''Is this a hate blog.''

      Just saying.

      Delete
    9. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton19 September 2017 at 08:37

      ''I didn't mention class Ziggy.''

      Have you never mentioned the 'McCanns sense of entitlement' or 'status' ? How they have kept them protected ?

      ''This idea of 'hate' comes from you Ziggy.''

      Several contributors over a number of months have accused you ( and the blog ) of hate.Many gave up trying to hold discussions on here for that reason. I believe you prefer to call it a 'dominant ideology' rather than 'hate'.The dominant ideology is expressed with quite a lot of anger and accusation though-is it not ?

      You can tell when the author feels personally involved in what or by whom they are writing about by what they say and how they say it. It's the carefully chosen words and tone that gives it away.The less they feel personally involved, the more objectively they write about the subject. The heavier the bias, the less objective the ideas expressed. Even if holding a strong view in one direction, the objective writer will set about destroying the opposing view with logic and facts that speak for themselves, rather than strongly held opinions. If they can't, the frustration sticks out between every line.

      Delete
  8. Good to be back, Ros.
    I feel the gist of your latest blog here has flown over most of the commentator's heads. It was the unseemly haste of the Mcs to court the media, the very odd instigation of Gerry's Blog which read like he'd lost nothing more than a pound and found a penny. The lack of contrition, the stony faces, not searching, the total lack of emotion, the 3rd part distancing of "a little girl is missing" was bizarre and made many an eyebrow be raised. The marketing was utterly mercenary; immediately Maddie became a commodity - the online shop - the ill advised comments, the shift of emphasis from their missing child to employing every means they could muster to sympathetic victimhood, employing the ill-fated Bell Pottinger to rescue their reputation as child neglectors. The Ward of Court. The trademarking, "the sitation she finds herself in"....
    And it all back fired because all parents know what losing a child would actually do to them - and none of that ever emanated from those two. They were never distraught, dishevelled, incapable of functioning. Far from it. Busy out jogging, playing tennis...
    Couple that with ever conflicting accounts of that week, the fleeing from Portugal after promising they'd never leave without Maddie, the donations spent on their mortgage - that was the catalyst for their demise with all those who donated to the fund.
    The continual litigation shouts out they need lawyers to hide their guilt. To cap it all they insulted every parent in the land by suggesting we all leave our kids like they did. The hell we do. We, thankfully, are nothing like those two.
    -
    SixYearsInaComanMan

    ReplyDelete
  9. I was affronted by that too SYIACM. Bad enough we are known as a nation of football hooligans, we now have a nation of child neglecters! I was quite openly shouting at my TV, at those dopey TV presenters, saying 'we all do it!'. No we don't. We wouldn't dream of it!

    The message from this tragedy should have been Never Ever Leave Small Children Alone. And then, bizarrely, 'in case of an abductor'. The least likely thing to happen!

    Toddlers are accidents waiting to happen! You can't take your eyes off them for a minute. I whiled away a bit of time this afternoon watching Cute Babies and Dad Saves. I've always known women have a telekenic (is that the right word?) word with their kids, but apparently men do too! When their kids are in danger, they find 'Hulk' like abilities to whisk their kids out of harm's way. It always brings an aw shucks moment for me, because I had the best dad in the world. I hope many out there will argue with me, lol.

    I don't doubt the McCanns love their kids, arguably it is their love of their kids that drives them. The idea of separation must be tortuous. I feel pain for Gerry and Kate as I write this, but I just wish they would stop prolonging the charade. It isn't doing them any good, and it can't possibly be doing their family and friends any good.

    I suspect the truth of what happened is far less heinous than everything that has been concocted in the media and on the internet over the years. The truth is, only a handful of people really know what happened, and it would seem their lips are still sealed.

    The reply may be appear before the comment. Don't ask, lol.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Ros Part 2 lol
      What was it they were advised? "Well within the bounds of normal parenting". The hell it was. Like you, I was aghast, nay, fuming that this was the "new normal". Get a grip MSM!
      How dare the Mcs tar us with their toxic brush! For a start if one of our children had gone missing we'd be out searching 'til we dropped, not concocting a timeline (or two) to keep our stories straight.
      Nor would we be writing a blog or starting an on line shop. We would be appealing on TV, given the chance, to the abductor, we'd give up everything to get our child back. Not these two. They wanted everyone else to search, to pay, to deploy their time and efforts.
      Nor would we ever call our first born "ALMOST" perfect. Our kids are totally perfect. Always.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan
      P.S. No Ros, I had the best Dad in the world lol!

      Delete
    2. Lol at your ps. SYICM, I'm delighted to hear it, but had I been 5 and you 6, you would have got a black eye for that! ;)

      Delete
    3. Ouch! Given we're the same age I'd be telling Mum on you! lol!
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan #1957 #GreatYear

      Delete
    4. *Telekinetic Ros, there you go ;D. Thought I would take my turn and be the pedant for today to hopefully take your mind off the rudeness of some of the posters. I cannot comprehend why people come here to try to change your mind for you when you are capable of sensible thought yourself and if anything was to change your mind you would have found the reason to change it by now. Enjoy the rest of your day Ros. A friend :)

      Delete
    5. Thank you Julie. The rudeness doesn't bother me, I feel kind of sad for them that they have such poor communication skills. They are like toddlers who lash out because they don't have the vocabulary to explain themselves.

      It's quite funny that in blackening my name for all these years, the worst charge they have against me, is misuse of an apostrophe! Wonder if that's enough for Gamble to get me in the dock, lol.

      Thank you for your kind wishes Julie, it is nice to know I have a friend (many I hope) out there, who can see through the BS.

      Delete
  10. Fantastic informative blog Ros.
    This case is like no other mystery in history.
    Who else in recorded history has disposed of their child and made millions of pounds orchestrating a fake search. (with the help of their own government)
    But think about it.. when you are suspected of murder you will fight for your life.
    A latter day confession would have helped, but they were in too deep.
    From day one careers were on the line - minimum.
    Terrible tragedy.
    jc

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you jc.

      I think you have summed it up in a nutshell there! There is not other case like it. The amount of money raised for one missing child was phenomenal. Basically it enabled them to launch a multimillion pound campaign, to build a wall of protection around themselves.

      For this group of ambitious professionals, all their careers were on the line. In their earliest interviews, they were defending the 'neglect' issue, as if they expected to be charged with that. Ergo, the very detailed timeline of their checks on the kids, written on Madeleine's colouring book. It was a collective decision, it would seem.

      Those claiming 'no neglect' have missed the point. It was the neglect charges they feared the most.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous19 September 2017 at 04:14

      ''Who else in recorded history has disposed of their child and made millions of pounds orchestrating a fake search.''

      Quite right. But then which police force has knowingly let that happen and never charged the culprits.

      Delete
  11. Hi Ros.
    You never bore me. Quite the opposite. The #Mc tag is the place to go for predictable Groundhog Day repetitious schoolyard bickering - folk flock here for that off the wall left field muse they won't get anywhere else. Not that many would admit it.
    Back to the plot, yes, everyone is to blame for the Mcs plight but themselves. They deem themselves the entitled, the arbiters by which we should all comport our inferior selves. It's that imperious, arrogant didactic tone they exude that alienates normal people. They made damn sure that the PJ and, as you say, Portugal itself, was to blame for their child remaining missing, projecting their own incompetence onto the blameless.
    However, their inability, rather, reluctance, to look inwards, to see that they were the only ones at fault was not something they would ever entertain. Everyone else was marching out of step.
    They truly believe in their store-bought elevated status and must live the lie forever, which has taken its toll on Kate - not so Gerry - he's not aged a day and always appears to revel in his infamy.
    Matters not whether they are ever brought before the beak as suspicion will forever hover around them. Their reputations are ruined, they are mistrusted in the UK and truly despised in Praia da Luz.
    Yet, as you say, they've not conquered the Internet, where hive minds deduced what a pair of charlatans they were/are years ago. Even their powerful influential associates cannot eradicate public opinion as displayed in every comments section of on line news outlets.
    -
    SixYearsInaComaMan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The McCanns demonising of the Portuguese police and the Portuguese people, may well come back to haunt them SYIACM. It might even be the driving force behind the PJ's own lengthy investigation. They will be looking to clear themselves, not the parents.

      I simply cannot comprehend how and why Gerry and Kate turned on the PJ and the local people of PDL. People who had been so kind to them and who devoted so much time looking for their daughter.

      Many of those people lost their jobs and livelihoods in the aftermath of Madeleine's disappearance. Their town is said to be a haven for paedophiles and criminals, killing their tourist industry still further. To protect the McCann's imagine, the town must be destroyed. That's cold.

      Who knows what Gerry and Kate would have got away with if it hadn't been for the huge wave of protest from the internet. GA's book would have been banned and no-one in the UK would have been able to criticise them, without ending up in the dock. Their venture into this area with Sky News spectacularly backfired with the tragic death of Brenda Leyland. I think that event too would have seen a major peak on the suspicion graph.

      Anyway SYICM, it is pleasure to correspond with you, your writing is exquisite, you are clearly a man after my own heart with your love of words. Language should be a beautiful melody in our heads, not a cat stuck in a dishwasher!

      I am very fortunate in having such intelligent and articulate readers who keep the discussion lively and interesting. And of course, civil. I have never understood the mentality of having a one sided discussion group. After they all finish congratulating themselves for thinking the same way, where do they go from there? lol.

      Delete
    2. Hi Ros
      Indeed, the Mcs have made many powerful enemies as well as powerful friends. You can bet that the PJ and many UK papers are biding their time awaiting the day the tide turns to exact revenge - yes, revenge, revnge for having had their reputations impugned. Double that for the denizens of Praia da Luz.
      The Mcs, like ourselves, never foresaw what the Internet would/could do. Look at the GoFundMe for Goncalo. The Net, the only vehicle by which he was financially capable of mounting his winning defence.
      There was a concerted combined campaign by SKY/Mcs/Summers-Swann to try and stifle social media which, as you say, backfired culminating in the tragic death of Brenda. Her legacy, sad though that is, means they won't be trying that avenue again. Despicable behaviour. A pox on the MSM.
      My writing stems from being a journo for many years and, like you, had fierce editors who would render my copy grammatically correct but almost unrecognisable! You write the same way I do now, without that stifling editorial constraint, which is why I understand everything you say. That is, the message is clearly conveyed and bugger the grammar Nazis! You have attracted a very discerning audience and contributors, and to reiterate,, everyone DOES get a say here, the yays and the nays. That, to me, is debate: alive and kicking, unlike the graveyards of CMOMM, MMM, #Mc and the terminally dormant, "comply or goodbye", battle of the egos self-congratulatory Facebook regimes, sorry, groups.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    3. Isn't it liberating SYICM!

      Tis true, I am oft prone to grammatical error, and using medieval words, lol, and I have two reasons for this. 1. I was traumatised by an over zealous English teacher wielding a ruler, and 2) All my favourite writers broke every rule in the book. From PG Wodehouse to Sue Townsend. I like to think my readers can hear my exaggerated pronunciation and Margaret Rutherford voice! And occasionally the mischevious Irish woman who just wants to have an irreverent craic.

      That you are a writer wafted from your prose SYICM, and like myself stubborn enough to stick to your guns. The grammar Nazis I suspect, are not very well read, because while they are looking for spelling errors and misplaced apostrophes they are missing the text.

      But what irks me most of all, is that their need to humiliate puts so many people off writing or expressing their views. I think everyone should write, we all now have the opportunity to correspond directly with future generations. Good or bad, it matters not, it will be precious to their families.

      On sites like CMoMM, there were hundreds, if not thousands of 'lurkers' (horrid word), people who read but were too afraid to post because of the nastiness dished out to newcomers. They were ridiculed for not being familiar with EVERY aspect of the case and treated as imposters until proven otherwise. Bizarre, as if anyone cares, lol.

      Anyway. Good to meet a fellow traveller, in the literary sense of course.

      Many who want to write fear what people will think of them - seasoned hacks however, know 99.9% won't give two hoots. The grammar Nazis however, enforce the negative beliefs.

      I'm proud and delighted to say I have been banned by some or all the groups you mention, some sooner than later, lol. Not for being rude, abusive, or a bad speller,(as if!) but for not joining in with the group mentality. Tbh, this is a historic fault of mine, I've never 'got' group mentality - always shied away from it. I much prefer the outsider role.

      Delete
    4. ''this is a historic fault of mine, I've never 'got' group mentality - always shied away from it. I much prefer the outsider role. ''

      Would you say that the mentality that believes the McCanns are guilty of a horrible crime and of lying to the whole world is a tiny group then ?

      Delete
    5. My last post was in jest before anybody pulls me for it, plus Ros did ask :) A friend.

      Delete
    6. Hi Ros!
      Liberating? You bet it is! Your blog's not an English Language O-level paper for us to sit, thank heavens. And yes (he added, starting the sentence with a conjuction lol) there's nothing better than to boldly split an infinitive. We know the "rules" which is why we break 'em! lol.
      We both learned a lot from editors and ended up sounding like everyone else - that's not us. Give me train of thought any day.
      Some punctuation is necessary but leaving out commas and semi-colons won't kill anyone. Since I left the trade my spelling's got worse, too, but ask me if I care!
      I was banned from CMOMM for calling Bennett a 'control freak' and from one or two others for daring to posit ideas that were counter to their narrow group oeuvre. This is why here is a Godsend for normal people to carry on, as I have said before, like we're sat around a pub table enjoying the craic.
      I, too, was always outspoken and hats off to you for 'keeping it real'. What you say is immediately comprehensible and well written, it doesn't need editorial vetting (I'm sure editors are megalomaniacs!)
      Anyway, this is about Mcs V Free Speech and it's the latter we want to preserve every which way we can. You attract the independent thinkers who, like myself and yourself, are persona non grata at the likes of Stalag CMOMM et al. More people post here than CMOMM and MMM combined - I think that says it all.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
  12. http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/50Questions_ENG.pdf

    35 Have States ever refused to cooperate with the Court?

    There have been cases where States have omitted or even refused to provide the Court with the information and documents required for its examination of an application. In such cases the Court may find against the State under Article 38 of the Convention (obliging States to furnish all the necessary facilities to the Court).

    ReplyDelete
  13. http://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Your_Application_ENG.pdf

    USEFUL THINGS TO KNOW

    „ Anonymity

    The documents relating to the proceedings before the Court are accessible to the public. If you wish to remain anonymous, you must say so when you fill in the application form, and explain why you do not want your identity to be disclosed.

    „ Friendly settlement

    If the Court considers your application admissible it will endeavour to find an agreement – a friendly settlement – between you and the respondent Government. If that proves impossible, it will examine your complaints and deliver a judgment.

    „ Unilateral declaration

    If you refuse an offer of a friendly settlement without justification, the Court may strike your application out of its list following a declaration by the Government acknowledging that there has been a violation of the Convention and undertaking to provide you with adequate redress.

    „ Interim measures

    You may request an interim measure, but only if you are in immediate danger or there is a serious threat to your health – for example, if you are about to be removed to a country where you risk being tortured.

    ReplyDelete
  14. SixYearsInaComaMan 08:50

    pronounces

    "Their reputations are ruined"

    Perhaps you could do some investigative journalism and post details of Gerry's work achievements since 2007.

    I suppose for comparison you could post exactly what Ros has achieved in the same period.

    This is posted under the open mike rule.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous19 September 2017 at 17:41

      encore encore

      Delete
    2. To: Anonymous19 September 2017 at 17:41

      Their reputations are ruined. You may think otherwise if you only read the splash banners on tabloids or listen to the MSM. They are the only ones who continue to lionise the Mcs.
      You only have to read any comments section on said tabloids to grasp the public's opinion.
      I am sure that in the past ten years Gerry's heart consultation vocation has continued to blossom, as has the suspicion around his many conflicting statements regards the night of 3-5-07.
      What relevance that has to Ros's blog regards 'the mystery of the century' is a non sequitur. What she has provided is a level playing field platform for discussing the disappearance of MBM which you yourself have contributed to. It is to this specific avenue of debate that Ros has achieved what many have sought to do and failed.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    3. Many thanks SYIACM. Yep, I'm quite pleased with the way my blog has evolved. Far be for me to blow my own trumpet, but it was a case of create my own system or be enslaved by another man's (or woman's)!

      As you say, it is ridiculous that we cannot discuss the mystery of the century civilly and without threat of prosecution. Gerry and Kate are not private people. They have kept themselves in the news, they regularly put out press releases, of course people will 'talk'. I'm glad to have created a place where sane people can exchange views.

      As for my achievements 17:41, I actually achieved a lifetime ambition. I had a book picked up by a major publishing house. Nothing to do with Madeleine, but attacked by McCann supporters nevertheless.

      Prior to that, I raised two kids as a single working mum (didn't lose either), and ticked life goal boxes by gaining a degree as a mature student and teaching in a college.

      I'm not the under achiever you would have people believe 17:41, in fact it is amazing what I can do when I set my mind to it. Whilst my achievements may not be as lofty as Gerry's, they were my dreams and I'm proud of them.

      But again, I am in wonderment, how does the father of a missing child study for a PhD?

      Delete
    4. @ SixYearsInaComaMan 19:07

      Did you even read my post at 17:41 because your reply failed miserably?

      The relevance to Ros's blog is that she says she has moved on in the last 10 years whereas she says the Mccanns haven't. I dispute that fact.

      If you really think that Ros provides a balanced blog that reflects views from all sides in an "open mike" manner then you are seriously deluded and it probably accounts for your failure to get things past editors.

      Try doing some research rather than reading comments in tabloids.

      (comment saved in case it ends up in the well know spam box that Ros has)

      Delete
    5. Hi Ros
      One of my ambitions was to have my work published. You achieved same and let's just say it - that feels really good. It never leaves you; that desire to make your voice heard. I too am anti-censorship as in 'who guards the guards'?
      You've no need to defend your academic achievements, they shine through on this very blog. You post up personal criticism as well as the praise - an oasis of rationality amidst the anarchic plethora of outmoded forums governed by those who demand their one train of thought and one alone.
      You should be proud of what you've achieved. Others have tried to entertain both sides of the divide which have always fallen apart when admins show their true colours. Free thinkers get their say here without fear or favour and here harbours a civility absent elsewhere. That is down to you and your immutable live and live attitude. Everyone is allowed to state their opinion, a good old fashioned debating society where nothing is off the table.
      As you say, the Mcs made themselves the Aunt Sallys, not us. They affronted normal decent people, and those same people come here to redress the balance.
      You'll be here long after the rest fade into obscurity.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    6. Anonymous19 September 2017 at 19:07

      ''You only have to read any comments section on said tabloids to grasp the public's opinion.''

      And their mentality.It's up their with Youtube's comment section. So that's the gauge we're using is it. Priceless.

      Delete
    7. ''But again, I am in wonderment, how does the father of a missing child study for a PhD?''

      I think we all are.Who are we talking about ? If it's Gerry McCann, what's he studying ? I thought he had a doctorate before he had children.

      Delete
    8. Comments sections of national newspapers and youtube etc, are an excellent gauge for public opinion 22:13. Maybe that's where you are going wrong?

      Delete
    9. To: Anonymous19 September 2017 at 22:13

      Far be it from me to denigrate the opinion of so many and tar them all as having mentality problems as you suggest. They are the great unwashed, same as you and me and see through the Mcs like any sane person can.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    10. To: Anonymous19 September 2017 at 21:33
      "If you really think that Ros provides a balanced blog that reflects views from all sides in an "open mike" manner then you are seriously deluded and it probably accounts for your failure to get things past editors."

      I always got things past editors, verbatim after a while. I assure you I suffer no delusions as to the equivocal platform afforded us by Ros.
      I can also assure you my research is not confined to what I read but also who I know.
      When you mount your own blog akin to this you might understand how unique and important this place is. Until such time maybe you could research just how difficult a fair balance is to achieve.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    11. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton19 September 2017 at 22:35

      ''Comments sections of national newspapers and youtube etc, are an excellent gauge for public opinion 22:13. Maybe that's where you are going wrong?''

      Maybe. After ten years of uninformed ranting, I wonder where they're going wrong.But, kudos for having the courage to make a stand for the tabloids. The same ones that crucified Inspector Amaral and the PJ .I suppose sometimes they're 'unscrupulous rags' and other times they're quite the oracle. It depends on which myth you need to promote using 'sources'.

      Delete
    12. cedric pliers19 September 2017 at 22:41

      ''Far be it from me to denigrate the opinion of so many and tar them all as having mentality problems as you suggest. They are the great unwashed, same as you and me and see through the Mcs like any sane person can.''

      Far be it from me to denigrate the opinion of so many and tar them all as having mentality problems as you suggest. They are the great detectives of Scotland Yard.How come they didn't ' see through the Mcs' like any sane tabloid reader or youtube commentator .

      Delete
    13. I quite clearly stated COMMENTS SECTIONS 00:46 - that is the PUBLIC's response to the newspaper's story.

      You either have serious comprehension problems, or you are deliberately twisting my words.

      Delete
    14. I wonder if they think I am spamming their 'good' arguments SYIACM, only allowing the crap ones through, lol.

      What they don't seem to understand, is that I am as open to persuasion that the McCanns weren't involved as I ever was. God forbid, I should ever reach that stage where I know it all. I just wish one of them could come up with something logical and coherent.

      Delete
    15. To: Anonymous20 September 2017 at 00:52
      You said: "They are the great detectives of Scotland Yard.How come they didn't ' see through the Mcs' like any sane tabloid reader or youtube commentator?"

      They can. They are just not allowed to go against the UK Governent directive of protection of the Mcs, as evidenced, to gve one example, of them being escorted home by Special Branch. This applies to the MSM, the Government's mouthpiece, as well.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    16. Hi Ros.
      Your 'spam box' must be as barren as Antarctica. There's posts you've allowed/included here that call you from a pig to a goat. Not many people would countenance that.
      Nobody knows it all - apart from the Mcs - and they aint tellin'!
      Again, it's what makes it so interesting here: it reflects the full spectrum of opinion, the good, the bad and the aesthetically challenged lol!
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    17. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton20 September 2017 at 09:37

      ''I quite clearly stated COMMENTS SECTIONS 00:46 - that is the PUBLIC's response to the newspaper's story.
      You either have serious comprehension problems, or you are deliberately twisting my words.''

      They're reading a tabloid before they comment.

      Delete
  15. Cry and You Cry Alone: The Girl Who Vowed She'd Never Forget
    by Rosalinda V. Hutton

    Customer reviews
    3.9 out of 5 stars - total 19 reviews on Amazon.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Unfortunately for authors, their enemies can do their worst on Amazon Reviews.

      But I'm philosophical, it a book is good enough it will succeed. I still believe talent will always find a way. With every knockback, I am determined to try harder.

      Cry and You Cry Alone was completely out of step with the Misery Memoir Genre. I'm not a victim, there were more laughs than tears. And of course, there were no graphic descriptions of torture and abuse. It was an honest story, without embellishment.

      Unfortunately, my views on the McCanns impacted on my book's release, but also misery memoirs had run their course. There were many factors, but ultimately, I blame myself. Must try harder!



      Delete
    2. “I was very isolated and became engrossed in a forum on the McCann case. It
      was a way to switch off the pain of the real world. I’d gone from this
      lonely, isolated existence to suddenly having this huge arena of friends
      from all around the world.

      “We had this hardcore group, all women much like myself – similar age,
      backgrounds. We formed a friendship.

      “I wasn’t one of the evil ones – and there were a few of those around. I was
      attacking the McCanns and suddenly I became this object of attack by
      absolutely crazy people.”

      quote from Ros.

      Delete
    3. Not my words 12:00. You have taken them from The Sun. I don't speak like that, I don't write like, and you won't find anything comparable in my entire blog. I don't need to defend myself, because those words are so out of character they are laughable.

      And they are not the words of the charming journalist, Martin Daubney who interviewed me, he was as unnerved by the whole business as I was. The Sun, or someone, wanted a 'bad' McCann troll, they tried to make me fit the bill.

      But ce la vie, I know I'm not that person and I think it's apparent to everyone I meet, I don't need to explain.

      Delete
    4. @ Ros 11:18

      "After an idyllic early childhood in Surrey, Linda's life descended into poverty and chaos when her parents' marriage crumbled and her unstable mother's sanity declined.

      She experienced a brief period of comfort in a caring foster home before being plunged into the dark, terrifying world of a 1960s institution. St Anne's Convent, Orpington, was a Catholic children's home run by the infamous Sisters of Mercy and a former monk who inflicted bizarre and barbaric beliefs and practices on the children in his care.

      Cry and You Cry Alone is the achingly honest story of a survivor of shocking child abuse that took place in the heart of an English suburb."

      blurb about the book on Amazon.

      Delete
  16. October 14, 2004

    Tony Blair: A Cardiac Catheterization Success Story

    http://heart1.com/news/mainstory.cfm/293/126

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

    Kate McCann ('madeleine'):

    [Tuesday 8 May 2007]

    “As we [Kate McCann and Fiona Payne] were walking up from the beach at about 5pm, I had a call from Cherie Blair, in her final days as wife of the prime minister (her husband Tony would announce his resignation two days later and leave office the following month). She was kind and helpful. She told me it was amazing but encouraging that Madeleine was still the first topic on the news every night. This was only five days after the abduction: as it turned out, our poor daughter would continue to headline the bulletins for some time to come. Cherie also warned me, ‘Whatever happens, your life will never be the same again.’ She mentioned that a friend of hers, Catherine Meyer, was the founder of PACT – Parents and Abducted Children Together - and said she would get in touch with her on my behalf. Doubtless I asked Cherie if there was anything the British government could offer the Portuguese in the way of resources to assist or expedite the search for Madeleine. It wasn’t my intention to make her feel uncomfortable by asking this, and I’m sure I didn’t. We were just so desperate I couldn’t let the opportunity go by.”

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for posting that 17:44.

      What sticks in my craw with this extract is that on 8th May, Kate and Fiona were walking up from the beach. That is, while they were enjoying the beach, every able bodied person in PDL was searching for the missing child.

      If anyone is interested in how profitable charities work, I suggest they look up Catherine Meyers who made a very lucrative Chanel suit wearing career out of abducted children. A role model for Kate perhaps?

      The extract ends with the very assertive, not backwards in coming forwards, Kate 'humbly' asking Cherie for the British Government's help.

      My friend JB once described 'Madeleine' as the longest suicide note in history. And it is. Kate believes she is cleverly manipulating us, but you can quite literally let her book fall open at any page, and deconstruct exactly what she is doing.

      Her book 'Madeleine' recounts real time which is documented on film, in the media reports, and crucially, in the Portuguese police files. And the police files forced Kate to admit that they lied to the media, only a small 'tummy bug' lie, but a lie nonetheless.

      Delete
  17. Gerry McCann at 23h00 , May 3rd , not even one hour into the search, overheard while on the telephone saying that his daughter had been abducted by paedophiles.

    Who would be on the telephone instead of searching
    Who would have no hope of finding his daughter only after one hour?
    Who would say such a terrible thing to their family or friends not even one hour into the search.
    who, when the door they claimed to be unlocked would even think of an abduction in the first hour?


    "On e hour into the search by holiday makers of the hotel and surrounding areas, about 23.00 hrs, Mr McKenzie approached the McCann's apartment from the bushes at the rear of the apartment.

    He was searching the gardens. He did not know it was the McCann's apartment.

    He saw Mr Gerry McCann standing alone in the doorway at the rear of the apartment talking on his mobile telephone.

    Mr McCann was looking our over the swimming pool and did not see Mr McKenzie.

    Mr McCann was absolutely distraught telling the person receiving the call that he feared 'she (Madeleine McCann) had been taken by paedophiles'."

    http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/P15/15VOLUMEXVa_Page_3903.jpg

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous20 September 2017 at 14:23
      "Who would be on the telephone instead of searching
      Who would have no hope of finding his daughter only after one hour?
      Who would say such a terrible thing to their family or friends not even one hour into the search.
      who, when the door they claimed to be unlocked would even think of an abduction in the first hour?"
      -------------------------------------------------

      Who - with no experience of such a situation, would know what is right or wrong?
      Who - with no experience of such a situation, would know what to do in such a situation?
      Who - with no experience of such a situation, would know exactly what is "expected" in such a situation?

      Apparently all the Mccann hater commentators are experts in how to react to finding your child missing.

      Delete
    2. “He [Gerry McCann] said something along the lines of there being Paedophile gangs in Portugal and that they had abducted Madeleine. I was so shocked by this, having originally thought that she had just wandered off.

      I had looked up by now and we actually made eye contact, his conversation did not change at all when he realised that I was there.”

      http://www.mccannpjfiles.co.uk/PJ/GRAHAM-MCKENZIE.htm#p15p3907

      Gerry McCann didn’t expect anybody to find anything out there?

      Delete
  18. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton20 September 2017 at 13:20

    Not my words 12:00. You have taken them from The Sun. I don't speak like that, I don't write like, and you won't find anything comparable in my entire blog. I don't need to defend myself, because those words are so out of character they are laughable.

    And they are not the words of the charming journalist, Martin Daubney who interviewed me, he was as unnerved by the whole business as I was. The Sun, or someone, wanted a 'bad' McCann troll, they tried to make me fit the bill.
    --------------------------------------------------------

    So Ros will you now believe that not everything written in the tabloids - even in quotation marks as a direct quote, are not necessarily true and stop using them to make your snarky negative comments about the Mccanns?

    Maybe you should - as you say "Must try harder!" and stop passing your personal comments and opinions about the Mccanns and restrict yourself to the facts about missing Madeleine Mccann.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. My opinion isn't based on newspaper quotes 16:14,it's based on so much more.

      As for restrict myself to the facts about missing Madeleine McCann, I feel as though I am back on a facebook page.

      So no personal comments and opinions allowed? What a strange kind of world you desire.

      Delete
    2. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton20 September 2017 at 16:49

      "My opinion isn't based on newspaper quotes 16:14,it's based on so much more."
      ----------------------------------

      Well it is certainly not based on personal meetings.
      It is certainly not based on the files because you still believe there was "blood splatter" on the walls.
      So what is it based on?

      Your warped opinion that you are some sort of expert in everything that has ever been created.

      Why not stop the personal comments and opinions? Does that stop you from being nasty and vindictive in something that has nothing to do with you?



      Delete
    3. I don't claim to be an expert 17:13. I muse. Should add, I also read a lot. It is my passion, my hobby and my OCD.

      Gerry and Kate always want a free ride. That is, they issue the press statements, they approve the stories. That way, only their side of the story gets heard in the UK.

      That offends me on every level 17:13. Had the MSM been honest over the years, I probably wouldn't be here. But I am, because I know this is all a big fat lie, and my conscience will not allow me to watch an innocent man being persecuted without saying anything.

      You are calling me nasty and vindictive for protesting the punishment of the detective who searched for Madeleine. That is truly f*cked up.

      Delete
    4. ''You are calling me nasty and vindictive for protesting the punishment of the detective who searched for Madeleine. That is truly f*cked up.''

      maybe 17:13 suspects that your 'protest' is a little one dimensional.In other words, a rage against anything and everything McCann, no matter how desperate it sounds. Amaral is giving you a reason to do it and you're grasping it with both hands and nobody could part you from it.

      Delete
    5. As somebody who doesn't claim to an 'expert', are you aware of how many times you tell anyone who has a different view to you how stupid they are or that they're talking 'nonsense' even though they have the same amount of evidence as you(none) ? Are you aware of how many times you begin a 'muse' with ''i have no doubt'' and then merely go onto more speculating ?

      Delete
    6. Yes, I can see how that would grate 21:28, but that's what happens in grown up debates. I work on the assumption that the majority of posters won't be running home to tell their mums.

      Delete
  19. @ cedric or Anonymous20 September 2017 at 12:11

    "Hi Ros.
    Your 'spam box' must be as barren as Antarctica."

    I have submitted a biography of Gerry Mccann - to do your research for you as you were so insulting - to this fair and factual blog that Ros runs. Have you seen it?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nothing in my spambox, why don't you re-submit?

      Delete
    2. @ Ros 18:31 how convenient - I have posted it again.

      Delete
    3. To: Anonymous20 September 2017 at 17:32
      I wasn't being insulting. As for Gerry's CV I really don't care if he discovered DNA and built the Saturn 5 rocket. What I am interested in is his and Kate's machinations during that holiday.
      -
      SixyearsinaComaMan

      Delete
  20. Anonymous20 September 2017 at 16:24

    ''Apparently all the Mccann hater commentators are experts in how to react to finding your child missing. ''

    Of course they are.They're also experienced detectives and lawyers. They all passed a home study course or two using a mountain of tabloids.

    ReplyDelete
  21. I assert mine and everybody's right to an opinion. This is not yet a Dictator State. Snr. Amaral's book is not his opinion but his scientific deduction from known facts, which are available in English from the PJ files.
    The McCanns have not become deeply unpopular because they are photogenic (some may disagree: they are entitled to do so) or because they appear not only to be above the law but to be sponsored by our Police Force. AdmittIng to abandoning ones children continually even with knowledge that they were distressed and told their parents of this, would in most circumstances involve Social Services, medical examinations and thereafter a close watch on those children and their parents.
    Having initially donated funds to find Madelaine (hello! There was a child at the heart of this story) I was confounded to hear the story unfold of litigious and arrogant people squashing all enquiry and dissent.
    I dissent. I want to know how a blood dog and a cadaver dog with 100% record gave signals that have not been considered.
    I want to know why the statements conflicted in so many ways. I want to know why the Fund was set up immediately, when Maddy might have been found alive or dead, and as a Limited Company with no oversight. How has that money been disbursed? I want to know about wiped phones and camera images that were tampered with. I have an opinion and I'm entitled to it.
    The McCanns have hoisted themselves on their own petard by their slips, the constant love of camera interviews and by their vicious need to persecute anyone who sees the flaws in their story. Blood is blood, DNA is DNA, and the need to squash opionions is purely a mechanism of bullying and coercion which has become transparent.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Great post Lone Wolf! You may describe yourself as 'lone' but I suspect you reflect the views of many!

      Delete
    2. Lone Wolf20 September 2017 at 17:42

      ''I assert mine and everybody's right to an opinion. This is not yet a Dictator State. Snr. Amaral's book is not his opinion but his scientific deduction from known facts, which are available in English from the PJ files. ''

      A scientific deduction from known facts would be considered evidence. That evidence would be all that was needed to arrest , charge and put the McCanns on trial. What happened to it ? Could you share the 'facts' and the 'scientific deduction' ? Amaral was gone before the dog's arrived by the way. He didn't trust the McCanns and he was suspicious of them and their friends. That's it. No facts; no scientific deduction - unless you can correct that.

      ''The McCanns have not become deeply unpopular because they are photogenic (some may disagree: they are entitled to do so)''

      You got that right.The public domain don't like attractive people unless they're celebrities.It's unfortunate but true that a large amount of anger toward the pair has their attractiveness at the root.Not exactly deep stuff is it.

      '' I want to know how a blood dog and a cadaver dog with 100% record gave signals that have not been considered.''

      Don't we all. The official line is that DNA and blood examination didn't qualify as strong enough evidence to identify anyone as perpetrators of a crime( that's scientific).

      '' I want to know about wiped phones and camera images that were tampered with. I have an opinion and I'm entitled to it.''

      You certainly are, as are we all. But we should be aware of when we're expressing an opinion or quoting actual facts . Is it your opinion that images were tampered with and phones wiped ?If so, they might not have been.

      ''The McCanns have hoisted themselves on their own petard by their slips, the constant love of camera interviews and by their vicious need to persecute anyone who sees the flaws in their story. Blood is blood, DNA is DNA, and the need to squash opinions is purely a mechanism of bullying and coercion which has become transparent.''

      If the public can see 'slips' so can the detectives- even in hindsight. Your perception of them being vicious and in need of persecuting people who publicly accuse them of burying their child is irrational. If their child was abducted and they then have to fend off hate campaigns from the public and the allegations of a former detective who has yet to provide proof of them, are they supposed to remain stoic and behave nicely ? It's up to either SY or PJ to do the work, make the arrests, provide the evidence in court and then the public can have their rage party.Until then, it is what it is, regardless of the 'views of many' .

      VT

      Delete
    3. '' I want to know how a blood dog and a cadaver dog with 100% record gave signals that have not been considered.''
      Wrong - the same dogs got it wrong at Haut de La Garenne in Jersey!

      Delete
    4. And yet, 09:01, the McCanns with all their money and resources, have been unable to find an expert on EVRD dogs to condemn them as useless.

      Delete
    5. "And yet, 09:01, the McCanns with all their money and resources, have been unable to find an expert on EVRD dogs to condemn them as useless"
      Why should they? The McCanns haven't been charged with anything! Anyway, the fact that the dogs have already been proved wrong on another case would tend to suggest that they are unreliable.

      Delete
    6. Why should they 11:48? Because they are the ones trying to convince the world the dogs are unreliable.

      Delete
    7. They don't have to - the dogs have already shown their unreliability. Just google Haut De La Garenne cadaver dogs and you'll find the videos of those same dogs getting very excited and indicating where the dead bodies were!

      Delete
    8. And of course 14:12, just google how the same expert handler (Martin Grime) and same dogs, and their expert handler, gave evidence that led to the conviction of D'Andre Lane for the murder of his 2 year old daughter Bianca in the USA.

      Delete
    9. I believe that the dogs used in the D'Andre Lane case were different dogs - please correct me if I'm wrong. But even in this case Grimes conceded in court that any indications given by a cadaver dog would normally require the corroboration of the discovery of an actual cadaver.
      However, the fact that the same dogs used in PDL erred at Haut De La Garenne would be sufficient for any normal person (or jury) to question the dog's suitability as 'expert' witnesses in any legal case.

      Delete
    10. OK, you got me 15:30. Keela was out there, Eddie was replace by Morse, but they were from the kennels of dog handling expert, Martin Grime.

      D'Andre Lane launched an appeal to dismiss the evidence of Martin Grime's dogs, (it failed) so no they weren't on the same side. Haut De La Garenne never got a mention btw, so your little straw clutcher there has already proved useless.

      Delete
    11. "D'Andre Lane launched an appeal to dismiss the evidence of Martin Grime's dogs, (it failed) so no they weren't on the same side. Haut De La Garenne never got a mention btw, so your little straw clutcher there has already proved useless."

      I have not studied the Lane case like you obviously have, but I did read what Grimes told the court.
      The question still has not been answered - If one set of dogs fail miserably on the one occasion, then how on earth can you trust that same set of dogs on another? I'm not saying that they didn't smell a cadaver, they may well have, but they may have got excited the same way as they did at Haut De La Garenne. What is the dogs' success rate? I imagine it's far less than 100%

      Delete
    12. "At trial, FBI Canine Program Manager Rex Stockham testified as an expert in forensic canine operation. Stockham testified about the process of training and testing victim recovery dogs. Stockham's protocol called for regular single-and double-blind testing of dogs throughout their working lives. Stockham's program had three full-time handlers in its program, including Martin Grime. Stockham testified that he had tested Morse and Keela, Grime's dogs, and that both dogs had accuracy ratings in the high 90 percent range."

      Delete
    13. But only one of those dogs was at Haut de la Garenne and PDL.

      Delete
    14. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton21 September 2017 at 15:42

      ''OK, you got me 15:30. Keela was out there, Eddie was replace by Morse''

      Morse was killed off in 2000. I think it was Lewis.

      Delete
    15. The dogs did not err at HDLG . Eddie alerted to what he is trained to . Human decomposition . Just like in the McCann case, it doesn't mean a body must be there . It means a body was there at some stage . Just like in the Zapatta case . The dog alerted to human decomposition but the body was not there .

      Pitty that Gerry McCann didn't count on Eugene Zapatta's confession . Chagrin ...

      Delete
    16. "The dogs did not err at HDLG . Eddie alerted to what he is trained to . Human decomposition . Just like in the McCann case, it doesn't mean a body must be there . It means a body was there at some stage . Just like in the Zapatta case . The dog alerted to human decomposition but the body was not there"

      Please let us know what evidence you have of that - because the police authorities dismissed the dogs signals of human decomposition at Haut De La Garenne.

      Delete
    17. The authorities did not find a body . The authorities cannot objectively say if a body or bodies had not been there at some given time .

      Please provide evidence that the authorities said there had never been any human bodies or someone deceased in HDLG.

      The facts are simple : The cadaver dog alerts to the presence of human decomposition .


      some dogs have better track records than others . Both Eddie and Morse have impeccable track records . I know it doesn't suit the McCanns fable but they'll just have to get used to not being blindly believed .

      Delete
    18. "Please provide evidence that the authorities said there had never been any human bodies or someone deceased in HDLG."

      Try this link: -

      https://www.theguardian.com/uk/2008/nov/12/hautdelagarenne-policechief-murder

      Delete
    19. From your linked article ,

      "Of the 170 bone fragments found at the site, scientific analysis has proved that only three could be human; two of those might date back as far as 1470, and the other to between 1650 and 1950, said Gradwell"

      Your linked article is clear evidence that somebody died there . Furthermore , deaths ( suspicious or non suspicious ) in a buiding that dates to 1860's and always lodged large amounts of people are inevitable . I did not ask for the conclusions of the historical abuse first enquiry nor did I ever state a body is required to be there for the dog to alert .

      In summary, Eddie was correct . People died in HDLG. in fact the probability is that many people died in HDLG over 150 + years and had funerals and are not buried in the grounds .

      Your linked source actually gives evidence of bones from 3 different people some of them historical . If by some abrahaamic miracle no one else died there but those 3 , well Eddie was far more efficient than even I thought and can detect human cadavers dead for 500 years . Quite impressive . A whole new perspective on the reliability of Eddie .




      Delete
  22. Here's an idea Ros - why don't you step back from the Mccann insults for a while - let's say - a month, and stop pretending that you post all views.

    There are loads of things happening in the world that I am sure you have very strong views on.

    Why not give it a try and see if cedric, ruth, julie and (conspicuous by his absence), sharples - come back to support you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ros has blogs relating to other subjects which I also enjoy reading and will continue to read in future. A friend :D .

      Delete
    2. Why would I step back for month 17:53, my blog is more popular now than ever!

      People drop in and out 17:53, attendance isn't compulsory, lol. We all lives away from here, nobody needs to explain, as if!

      I'm sure it would suit you very well if I were to pack up for a month, is there something on the horizon?

      Delete
    3. @ Ros 18:38

      "is there something on the horizon?"

      Yes - your legacy for your family (you have said they disagree with you and to stop) - if you want to be remembered on the internet - don't forget you can't get rid of it - then carry on with your hate campaign - and that is exactly what it is.

      Google search "rosalind hutton" and see what comes up. Not pretty is it?

      Delete
    4. @ Julie20 September 2017 at 18:30

      Ros has blogs relating to other subjects which I also enjoy reading and will continue to read in future. A friend :D .
      ------------------------

      where - or is it a secret?

      Ros's last Mccann blog was JESS PHILLIPS, MELANIA AND IVANKA NOT FEMINISTS.
      http://cristobell.blogspot.co.uk/2017/08/jess-phillips-melania-and-ivanka-not.html

      I don't see any of your comments amongst the 8 there!

      Delete
    5. Simple to find if you look. I don't usually comment, that is why you will not find many comments from me. A friend :D.

      Delete
    6. To: Anonymous20 September 2017 at 17:53
      I support Ros whether I am here or not for being the free spirit that she is. The Mccanns is a hot topic and she's been on the case like I have from day one.
      She DOES post all views, does not insult the McCanns - but she, like many of us, is no fan of their despicable behaviour.
      This place is more popular than it has ever been and there's a reason for that. Her name's Ros.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    7. Google Rosalind Hutton and see what comes up, eh 19:23, not pretty is it. It's RosalindA btw, but the same amount of filth and vitriol comes up either way.

      And that, 19:23, is why I am still here and still fighting. I have been vilified online, and left unable to earn a living. The dossier compilers had over 100 pages on me, accusing me of everything from lying to producing snuff movies. Whilst defending their own reputations, the McCanns have learned a thing or two about wrecking other peoples.

      You hit the spot with that post 19:23, it reminded me of why I am here, and how much my legacy means to me. My blog is the only tool I have to redress the balance.

      I don't have the option of legal proceedings and high priced lawyers, and my attackers are of course, too cowardly to put their names to their vitriol.

      But I do, however, have a way with words. Those who go beyond those first google results, can read my side here, and judge for themselves. I'm happy for my blog to be judged in it's entirety, by a Court, a national newspaper, or a jury of my peers.

      ALL of my work begins with Honesty and Integrity. In my vanity, I hope that it will be read by generations to come, and for my own family in particular, I don't ever want them to be ashamed of me.

      Yes, on occasions, I am harsh on Gerry and Kate, (God knows someone needs to be), because their actions are despicable. Those praising them all the time are just making their behaviour worse. Not to mention of course, they have got their heads buried in the sand.

      Delete
    8. ''Yes, on occasions, I am harsh on Gerry and Kate, (God knows someone needs to be), because their actions are despicable.''

      How disarmingly impartial.And how dare those McCanns lose a child.What was that about being wrongly accused of...what exactly...It seems your detractors don't have the monopoly on vitriol.

      Delete
    9. I find the McCanns vendetta against Goncalo Amaral, the former detective who searched for their child, despicable 13:18.

      I am REactive 13:18, not proactive. I respond to the bullshit in the MSM with a truthful account of what is going, and what the McCanns CLAIM is all about.

      The McCanns you see are PROactive, they are the pursuers, not the pursued. Bizarrely, they have been able to convince the MSM that they are the victims, that GA is hounding them, when the reality is, it is the other way around.

      I find the McCanns' demands for ALL the former's money and possessions, despicable and I'm far from the only one. In fact, I doubt anyone outside of their immediate circle believes Gerry and Kate have had their human rights abused.

      Delete
    10. ''I find the McCanns vendetta against Goncalo Amaral, the former detective who searched for their child, despicable 13:18. ''

      For somebody claiming to be doing nothing more than 'musing' and having no personal interest in the case you sure hide it well. Where's your emotional detachment ? Amaral made mistakes early on. His bosses removed him.I think anyone, regardless of their ideas of the mystery, would consider that unfair.However, his publishing of his suspicions have gathered pace around the www and he knew it would. He includes the UK intelligence in his complaints but in terms of a 'pursuit' he has only the McCanns in his cross hairs.That's a vendetta.

      ''The McCanns you see are PROactive, they are the pursuers, not the pursued. Bizarrely, they have been able to convince the MSM that they are the victims, that GA is hounding them, when the reality is, it is the other way around. ''

      They are PROactively trying to close down the rumours and allegations Amaral began and then promoted. The internet fan club do his bidding now. Amaral pursues revenge, the McCanns pursue justice.

      ''I find the McCanns' demands for ALL the former's money and possessions, despicable and I'm far from the only one''

      I think that was to make him stop his crusade and postpone online hysteria from vigilantes with scandal in mind.But, it didn't work. And the real action and real developments have ALL been over a publishing argument, not to solve the real case that matters

      '' I doubt anyone outside of their immediate circle believes Gerry and Kate have had their human rights abused.''

      Many believe that defamation, slander and libel shouldn't go unpunished and, further, that it's simple enough as that, without making it a press circus and matter for the ECHR.

      VT

      Delete
    11. The McCanns are the claimants Ziggy. Ergo, they are the pursuers. They have pursued their claim in every Court in Portugal and are now trying the ECHRs.

      Silencing the former detective will not stop the rumours. They began before GA was on the scene, and they have continued in the 10 years since, never dropping below the peak they hit when the McCanns were made arguidoes.

      Their need to punish Goncalo Amaral is sick and their need to take ALL his financial assets for themselves, is sheer greed.

      And be warned Ziggy, I can will pull the plug again if you keep up with this aggression and hostility. Are you so completely charmless that you are unable to have a discussion without being offensive?

      Delete
  23. Great blog and very informative.. Keep up the great work.. It is appreciated by many..

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Unknown20 September 2017 at 18:06

      what do you find "great and very informative" on this blog?

      Do you have evidence that "It is appreciated by many"?

      Delete
    2. Err, the evidence lies in the number of people who read and comment here every day 18:32. People from all over the world, and people who are highly educated and articulate.

      As much as you and your ilk, try to portray this blog as some sort of low life group of malcontents, it simply isn't true. And that becomes immediately apparent to anyone who reads here.

      Do you remember how your lot tried to portray 63 year old Brenda Leyland as a vicious internet thug? It back fired, because she clearly wasn't.

      The same applies here 18:32, the picture you paint bears no resemblance to reality. I'm not the leader (God forbid) or even part of any campaign to make the lives of this family miserable.

      I'm an individual, as are the people who read and post here. This a forum of free thinkers, but no-one is trying to rouse an angry mob, or incite any sort of behaviour that would interfere with the police investigation.

      Most are intelligent enough to understand that this case involves REAL people and children and are sensitive in their replies. Unlike the creep last week who tried to slip in two specific posts about the twins. Your assumption that I am THAT stupid btw, is both funny and offensive at the same time.

      I'm a big fan of individuality 18:32, I actually despise gang mentality, which is why I have never fitted in with any of facebook pages or forums. I won't be confined to one line of thinking.

      This is not a 'hate' blog. It is open and ongoing debate about the mystery of the century. Gerry and Kate's problems stem entirely from themselves. Their need to keep in the news. They became addicted to publicity at the off, enough to pay Lord Bell to keep them on the front pages of the newspapers for a year.

      Gerry and Kate want the good publicity, but they want new Laws introduced to protect them from the bad. Although, having said that, they also seem to encourage the bad, because it usually leads to a massive payout. The pro McCanns on twitter for example, spend their days trying to incite the 'antis' to say something outrageous so they can grab a headline. Some will have noticed they try the same thing on here, but I'm way too familiar with their little games.

      Delete
  24. Anon 16.14

    "So Ros will you now believe that not everything written in the tabloids - even in quotation marks as a direct quote, are not necessarily true and stop using them to make your snarky negative comments about the Mccanns?"

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

    So what about all the articles written by Tracey Kandohla?

    Does she make everything up as she goes along or does she have an insight as to what the McCanns are up to?

    What about her article regarding the money "ring fenced" that could be used to "buy a house" or "building equipment".

    Wasn't the money supposed to be used for looking for Madeleine or haven't the McCanns got time to look for Madeleine as they're too busy looking for a new house from the money gained off the back of their missing daughter?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @ Anonymous20 September 2017 at 18:30

      Believe what you want to believe - I don't believe a word that she says - but the haters grasp every word as the gospel to use against the Mccanns.

      Ros indicated that the tabloid press is not accurate - from her experience - so why don't you ask her?

      Delete
    2. Anon 19.43

      "I don't believe a word that she says"

      Why is it up to you - are you a mouthpiece for the McCanns. Surely it's up to the McCanns to say or are they hiding behind you? I'm not asking Ros, I'm asking you.

      So if it isn't true what Tracey Kandohla has been saying for the past 6 months or so, why aren't the McCanns suing her, they seem to be pretty fast at suing others who have said things the McCanns don't like (there is a long list on the internet of all those sued by the McCanns), why is TK not on the list?

      Delete
    3. Anonymous20 September 2017 at 19:43

      ''Believe what you want to believe - I don't believe a word that she says - but the haters grasp every word as the gospel to use against the Mccanns''

      Succinct and extremely accurate.

      Delete
  25. Professor Gerry McCann of the department of Cardiovascular Sciences gave his inaugural lecture of the above title on Thursday 22 September 2016 in the Frank and Katherine May Lecture Theatre. It was also attended by his Head of Department, Professor Tom Robinson, and the Head of College, Professor Philip Baker. Gerry's lecture focussed on his research in Aortic Stenosis, coronary artery disease and subclinical heart failure.

    Gerry McCann is Professor of Cardiac Imaging and a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Career Development Fellow at the University of Leicester. Gerry graduated in Medicine from the University of Glasgow in 1992 and undertook an intercalated BSc in Physiology and Sports Science, which stimulated his interest in the non-invasive assessment of cardiovascular physiology. His early postgraduate training and doctoral research was also completed in Glasgow. Whilst undertaking his doctoral research on “Exercise Limitation in Aortic Stenosis (AS)”, Gerry coordinated and lectured on the BSc in Sports Medicine, set up by his supervisor Professor Stewart Hillis, and undertook initial training in cardiology.

    Gerry was appointed as a specialist registrar in Cardiology at Leicester in 2000 and he developed a strong interest in cardiac imaging. He secured a European Society of Cardiology clinical fellowship in 2004 to undertake training in the rapidly developing technique of Cardiac MRI at the VU Medical Center in Amsterdam, under the supervision of Prof. van Rossum. He successfully worked on projects in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy, Pulmonary Hypertension and Coronary Artery Disease. It was during this year that Gerry saw the huge potential of MRI to better understand cardiac pathophysiology in vivo and most importantly, due to the excellent image quality and high diagnostic accuracy of the technique, to improve patient care. Gerry was appointed as a consultant cardiologist at Glenfield Hospital Leicester in 2005 undertaking general cardiology duties and running the expanded Cardiac MRI service with radiology colleagues. The stress MRI service was introduced in 2008 and is one of the largest and most successful in the UK.

    Gerry was awarded his first grant as a principal investigator, from the BHF, in 2007 to assess the role of left ventricular hypertrophy in limiting exercise capacity in AS. Several other grants were secured with colleagues and the opportunities arising from the NIHR were transformative to his career. Gerry led the bid that secured £2.2M (2009) to install a dedicated NIHR MRI research scanner at Glenfield Hospital; he received support from the NIHR Leicester Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit to undertake 6 months full-time research in 2010 and secured NIHR Postdoctoral (2011) and Career Development Fellowships (2014) before being appointed as Professor in April 2016. He is the deputy lead for Cardiovascular Research in the NIHR East Midlands CRN, Clinical Lead for research in the Trust Cardiorespiratory clinical management group and the Translational Medicine Facility, Chairs the Trust MRI research board, co-chairs the research group of the British Society of Cardiovascular MRI and is chair of the British cardiovascular society clinical specialty group on valvular heart disease.

    Professor McCann directs a very active Imaging research programme with funding (>£9M) from the British Heart Foundation, MRC, the NIHR and Industry. Working closely with local colleagues as well as National and International Collaborators, his research spans from biomarker discovery to large scale International Phase III Clinical Trials. Gerry particularly enjoys developing the skills of his postgraduate students and has successfully supervised 4 to completion of their doctorate with another 6 in progress.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't believe Madeleine was abducted and Gerry McCann's CV is completely irrelevant as to how she met her fate. I daresay surgeon, Ian Paterson, had a good CV, as did cardiologist Phillip Bonhoeffer.

      Delete
    2. Anon 19.37

      Gerry this, Gerry that.... Gerry McCann may have a list of medical attributions as long as his arm, but his daughter is still missing under "dodgy" circumstances, just because he's lauded by the medical profession doesn't distance himself from the fact that his daughter is missing and the cadaver and blood dogs detected a cadaver and blood in the McCanns' apartment in PDL in 2007.

      His medical attributions can't wipe away the stigma still attached to him and Kate McCann, even a judge in Portugal's highest court said that the parents have not been ruled innocent. GM's medical qualifications mean s*d all to the Portugese Court if the McCanns didn't co-operate in the disappearance of their own daughter.

      Kate McCann refused to answer 48 questions, the McCanns and their friends refused to do a reconstruction.

      Gerry McCann can do all the medical research under the sun he wants but the fact that he and his wife have not helped the Portuguese police in the disappearance of their own child will never go away, however much they want to sweep it under the carpet and blame everyone else for her disappearance as is if it was nothing to do with themselves.

      Delete
    3. All that before middle age.Can't say it isn't impressive.

      Delete
    4. Anonymous20 September 2017 at 20:38

      Anon 19.43
      "I don't believe a word that she says"

      Why is it up to you - are you a mouthpiece for the McCanns''

      And there it is yet again. Hate the McCanns or be called their 'mouthpiece' or part of the 'inner circle'. Welcome to open debate.

      Delete
    5. Anon 21.51

      The McCanns have always got someone else to do their dirty work for them for the past 10 years, or haven't you cottoned on to that yet. The McCanns will come out squeaky clean, they can say, well we never said that "so and so said that on our behalf". Let's hope you're not one of the "so and so's" that end up having to say why you said that on behalf of the McCanns. Duh, think about it!

      Haven't you learned anything yet in the past 10 years, or are you just on a part time basis, knowing nothing about Madeleine's "disappearance".

      Delete
    6. I'm not a fan of sneering 00:09, belittling an opponent doesn't make your case stronger, it makes you look like a jerk. Just saying.

      Delete
  26. Anonymous20 September 2017 at 20:59

    '' the fact that he and his wife have not helped the Portuguese police in the disappearance of their own child will never go away, however much they want to sweep it under the carpet''

    Then somebody from the PJ and their SY 'colleagues' should take some swabs from under that carpet and send them to a different forensics dept this time. The stigma mentioned is more to do with public suspicion. That won't go away because it's public suspicion. It's only the suspicion of a detective and his team that counts. They're being extremely patient waiting for the penny to drop aren't they.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Anon 20.23

    Not forgetting Harold Shipman.

    From Wiki -

    Shipman continued working as a GP in Hyde throughout the 1980s and began his own surgery at 21 Market Street in 1993, becoming a respected member of the community. In 1983, he was interviewed on the Granada Television documentary World in Action on how the mentally ill should be treated in the community. A year after his conviction, the interview was rebroadcast on Tonight with Trevor McDonald."

    The words "becoming a respected member of the community" jump out loud and clear but they meant nothing in the end.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous20 September 2017 at 20:23

      '' I daresay surgeon, Ian Paterson, had a good CV, as did cardiologist Phillip Bonhoeffer.''

      Anonymous20 September 2017 at 22:09

      ''( of Shipman)The words "becoming a respected member of the community" jump out loud and clear but they meant nothing in the end.''

      So, basically, you're both saying that whatever your status or profession in life, if you commit a serious crime, they won't save you from the law. I agree.But the prevailing 'ideology' around these parts is that they can( in the McCanns' case)

      VT


      Delete
  28. Anon 21.00

    It depends what impresses you. I've copied this from the GM's "impressive" list of boastings -

    "Gerry was awarded his first grant as a principal investigator, from the BHF, in 2007 to assess the role of left ventricular hypertrophy in limiting exercise capacity in AS. Several other grants were secured with colleagues and the opportunities arising from the NIHR were transformative to his career. Gerry led the bid that secured £2.2M (2009) to install a dedicated NIHR MRI research scanner at Glenfield Hospital; he received support from the NIHR Leicester Cardiovascular Biomedical Research Unit to undertake 6 months full-time research in 2010 and secured NIHR Postdoctoral (2011) and Career Development Fellowships (2014) before being appointed as Professor in April 2016. He is the deputy lead for Cardiovascular Research in the NIHR East Midlands CRN, Clinical Lead for research in the Trust Cardiorespiratory clinical management group and the Translational Medicine Facility, Chairs the Trust MRI research board, co-chairs the research group of the British Society of Cardiovascular MRI and is chair of the British cardiovascular society clinical specialty group on valvular heart disease."

    Well, that impressive list of boastings from 2007 to 2016 really shows that the "loss" of his daughter didn't impinge on his career in anyway and he went from strength to strength, not really worrying about Madeleine being in the hands of those "pedophiles" that Gerry insisted she was being held by, no laying awake night after night worrying about her predicament (or should that be the "predicament she found herself in"), not turning into a quivering wreck wondering what had become of his 3 barely 4 year old daughter, obviously Gerry just went about his life as usual gaining qualification after qualification, without any thought of any qualifications Madeleine would have achieved if she hadn't been left alone (if she was left alone) in that apartment in May 2007.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So, was he supposed to stop living ? Put everything on hold, thus opening the door to endless 'questions' about how he was paying the mortgage ( hint hint fund - watchers)? Or was he to throw himself into his work as two so-called teams of investigators 'turned every stone' looking for his daughter - thus opening the door to endless accusations of not caring ( ergo cold hearted liar). Lose, lose. That's what happens when you're under the magnifying glass of the half blind.

      VT

      Delete
    2. Anon 23.52

      No Gerry never stopped living did he or Kate, wasn't it the "Fund" that was supposed to "turn every stone", but found its way into the hands of Medoto 3, and any other nefarious con men that came the way of the McCanns, none of them being sued by the way by the McCanns to get their money back.

      Don't forget that the McCanns didn't co-operate with the PJ, so who are the "two so-called teams of investigators" you're referring to. Is that the PJ and SY, or the McCanns nefarious "investigators" they employed.

      None of us are half blind, most of us have been seeing very well for the past 10 years. I suggest you go back to the McCanns and get better instructions off them as to what you're supposed to be saying on their behalf.

      Delete
    3. ''None of us are half blind, most of us have been seeing very well for the past 10 years. I suggest you go back to the McCanns and get better instructions off them as to what you're supposed to be saying on their behalf.''

      I suggest you keep your over active imagination in check. Do you think the McCanns set out to be deliberately conned ? There's only so many things you can accuse them of before it becomes funny.

      Delete
    4. I think 'the two so called teams of investigators' are SY and the PJ 00:21, and a sign the McCanns are not happy bunnies. It would also suggest that SY and the PJ are working together.

      Delete
    5. I love that line 13:00. 'Do you think the McCanns set out to be deliberately conned?', despite it's split infinitive, lol.

      So the McCanns are going to claim they were 'deliberately conned'? Curiouser and curiouser. Who conned them? The cast of thousands who rushed out to assist them in PDL? Tony and Cherie Blair perhaps? How about Clarence Mitchell? CEOP maybe? Leicester Police?

      Then of course, there are the newspaper proprietors, the journalists, the lawyers, the spin doctors? But I'm going to go with Clarence. Partly because the 'pros' have started to have digs at him, and partly because he looks and acts as if he has been caste as the sleazy conman in a low budget film noire.

      Delete
    6. ''So the McCanns are going to claim they were 'deliberately conned'? ''

      I believe the reply that's amusing you was to the previous ''wasn't it the "Fund" that was supposed to "turn every stone", but found its way into the hands of Medoto 3, and any other nefarious con men ''

      and the rest of that nonsense.

      Delete
  29. Berlin, 6 June 2007

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQ3ForLXJT0

    Sabine Müller, reporter from German Radio: "How do you deal with the fact that more and more people seem to be pointing the finger at you, saying the way you behave is not the way people would normally behave when their child is abducted and they seem to imply that you might have something to do with it?"

    Kate McCann: "To be honest, I don't actually think that is the case. I think that is a very small minority of people that are criticising us. Um, you know, the facts are that we were dining very close to the children and we were checking on them very, very regularly. Um, you know, we are very responsible parents and we love our children so much and I think it's only a very few people that are actually, um, criticising us."

    Gerry McCann: "I have never heard before that anyone considers us suspects in this. And, um, the Portuguese police certainly don't. And without getting into too much detail about the circumstances, we were with a large group of people, um, and you know there is absolutely no way Kate and I are involved in this abduction."

    ----------

    6 June 2007

    Gerry McCann blogs: “The German interviewers are a little more direct with their questions but I was still surprised by the question as to whether Kate and I may be involved in Madeleine’s abduction! Hopefully our answers removed any doubt on that score and that our sole focus in all of the family campaigning is to get Madeleine back.”

    ----------

    21 September 2017

    I doubt it.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Thank you 08:18. This of course confirms that suspicion began long before anyone heard of Goncalo Amaral. The German reporter picked up on the parents behaviour and she was speaking for many of us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ros says: " The German reporter picked up on the parents behaviour"

      No she didn't - read it again - she says ""How do you deal with the fact that more and more people seem to be pointing the finger at you, saying the way you behave is not the way people would normally behave when their child is abducted and they seem to imply that you might have something to do with it?"

      In other words she was saying that haters on the internet - without any evidence whatsoever were saying the Mccanns were involved in some-way. This was a long time before the dogs were brought in and way before the files were released.

      Thankyou for confirming that you lied Ros when you said you only had doubts about the Mccanns after reading all the evidence.

      Delete
    2. Let's go with her ACTUAL words, rather than 'other words' 14:44, she doesn't mention haters or the internet, she said 'more and more people'.

      I had doubts long before I read all the evidence 14:44, it was the doubts that led me to read all the evidence!

      What I wouldn't do was comment negatively about the parents, until I reached that point of 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

      I hope that clears it up for you.

      Delete
    3. ''What I wouldn't do was comment negatively about the parents, until I reached that point of 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

      I hope that clears it up for you.''

      Try 'innocent until proven guilty'.

      Delete
    4. "Let's go with her ACTUAL words, rather than 'other words' 14:44, she doesn't mention haters or the internet, she said 'more and more people'."

      Please do not take her words out of the context of what was going on at that time. The only negative comments that were being publicly made then were those on tweets, blogs and forums, all on the internet.

      Delete
    5. @ Ros 14:56
      "I had doubts long before I read all the evidence 14:44, it was the doubts that led me to read all the evidence!

      What I wouldn't do was comment negatively about the parents, until I reached that point of 'beyond reasonable doubt'.

      I hope that clears it up for you."
      -------------------------------------

      Yes it confirms what I always thought - you had doubts and then looked for "evidence" to support your doubts.

      You didn't start from a level/impartial playing field - you have made things fit with what you wanted them to fit.

      "Statement from the General Attorney Office

      NOTE TO THE MEDIA

      Through a dispatch dated of today (21.07.2008), delivered by both magistrates from the Public Ministry responsible for the case, the archiving of the inquest concerning the disappearance of the minor Madeleine McCann was determined, for not having obtained evidence of the practice of any crime by the arguidos."

      Delete
    6. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton21 September 2017 at 14:56

      ''Let's go with her ACTUAL words, rather than 'other words' 14:44, she doesn't mention haters or the internet, she said 'more and more people'.''

      I don't think you have to be an Inspector Poirot to deduce that she could only be talking about the internet( and those blithering comment sections and forums). It can also be implied by what she actually said that the people referred to are the same people still going at it.She may not have actually said the word ' haters' but what else could she mean ? McCann 'non-sympathisers' ?

      Delete
    7. She quite clearly mean't non believers 21:21, and people who don't believe the abduction story are not haters. Failure to believe Gerry and Kate does not make the non believer a bad person.

      '...... she could ONLY be talking about the internet'. No 21:21, it was 2007, when people talked about the news around the water cooler, on buses and trains, with work colleagues and family. Again, she didn't mention the internet and she certainly didn't mention 'haters'.

      Haters, was a new word invented by Team McCann to describe people who didn't believe them. They claim it is personal dislike of them for being attractive and successful. The people who hate them are chavs and low lifes, oozing their jealousy.

      Delete
    8. Ros 22:52

      For God's sake Ros stop trying to act naive. Stop living in a dream world - the internet was alive and well in 2007. All the tabloids had online editions. Many newspapers had to shut their comments sections about Mccann articles down because of the hate that was been spewed at them day after day. Many newspaper run forums had to shut off all the hate.

      Incidentally how do you image a German reported picked up discussion around the water cooler.

      Even nowadays when there is a Mccann article in a paper the hate forums pronounce "comments are open" and they all rush to post their hate.

      When were you on AOL having wars with Mccann supporters?

      Delete
    9. ''Haters, was a new word invented by Team McCann to describe people who didn't believe them. They claim it is personal dislike of them for being attractive and successful. The people who hate them are chavs and low lifes, oozing their jealousy.''

      'Haters' was coined years before the McCanns even had children.Team McCann do NOT have control of the English language as well as the Police, Politicians and the media.That's all unfounded nonsense put about by people hoping to rev up the hate. Where have they claimed that the online mob are against them because they're attractive and successful ? And that they're chavs and low lifes ? can you supply the quote or is it another Ros quote / opinion ? if they haven't said it, you've imagine it or are just making it up. Is that 'impartial' ? There's an equal ( at least) chance that they don't like the accusations and endless personal attacks made on them by thousands of strangers who can't back a single one up. The internet ' court' members support each other. But that's all. Their claims need to be supported by facts and evidence.

      VT

      Delete
    10. @Anonymous at 04:02

      Kate McCann (‘madeleine’):

      “The internet has provided individuals like this with a largely unregulated opportunity to set up websites and forums and blogs where they can share their bile and hate with other faceless, anonymous lowlife, all locked away in their bedrooms talking to each other online."

      ----------

      Written by the faceless, anonymous webmaster on the Official Find Madeleine Campaign page:

      "Please don't post your opinion on leaving children alone. Doing so will result in you being banned. No questions asked."

      Delete
    11. Quite. 10:29.

      Kate and Gerry have always painted those who do not believe the abduction story as somehow mentally deficient. They describe them as social misfits hiding away in their bedrooms sharing bile and hatred. Ugly, lonely and bitter, they can't hide their jealousy of Kate and Gerry's happy marriage, perfect family and beautiful home.

      And with the power they had over the media, they were able to sell and promote this myth until it became a fact. Tell a lie often enough, and all that. Anyone criticising or questioning the saintly pair, did so because their own lives were so shit. Apparently, I'm a bitter, twisted old woman, who can't get a man. I can actually, I just can't keep 'em, lol.

      Delete
  31. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton21 September 2017 at 10:14

    ''Thank you 08:18. This of course confirms that suspicion began long before anyone heard of Goncalo Amaral.''

    Suspicion you say. Freudian slip or are you finally calming down and using some logic ?

    ReplyDelete
  32. "Thank you 08:18. This of course confirms that suspicion began long before anyone heard of Goncalo Amaral. The German reporter picked up on the parents behaviour and she was speaking for many of us."
    She's not speaking for you, she's just asking a question that a journalist would be expected to ask.
    The more I read this blog, the more I'm reminded of Monty Python's Life of Brian.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @13:18

      Can you explain why Sabine Müller's question was to be expected?

      Delete
  33. "Can you explain why Sabine Müller's question was to be expected?"
    Duh, because she's a journalist and she's looking for a story, and she would have been aware of the suspicions that were being raised at that time.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Interesting comment on the cesspit:
    (Lubbock case)
    by sar Today at 13:35
    "Well done Tony, amazing work. Appreciate your not supposed to be here but really appreciate some positive news"

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Why is Bennett not supposed to be there. What's the imbecile done now?

      Delete
  35. @Anonymous at 17:03
    ("Please do not take her words out of the context of what was going on at that time. The only negative comments that were being publicly made then were those on tweets, blogs and forums, all on the internet.")

    "At that time", i.e. before June 6, 2007.

    ----------

    June 11, 2007

    Gerry McCann on "the internet":

    "All Moroccan Children Are With You Madeleine- Madeleine: Back Home'. They were singing and cheering Madeleine's name and shouting 'coeur', Heart. This whole experience was uplifting and enlightening at the same time in that we had no concept that so many children in Morocco would know of Madeleine and also be internet- friendly. It is just as likely that a child will spot Madeleine and alert a responsible adult. The whole world really has changed and is a lot smaller in this computer age. If Madeleine is in Morocco we have no doubt that she will be found."

    ----------

    May 3, 2017

    Kate McCann: "I think the whole social media has got huge pros, but huge cons. On the downside, and all that's been written... I guess we protect ourselves really. We don't go there to be honest. We are aware of things that get said because people alert us to them. I guess our worry is for our children."

    ----------

    As Gerry McCann said, the whole world really has changed and is a lot smaller in this computer age.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gerry, Clarence and those proactive members of Team McCann went at the internet like a bull in a china shop. I guess no-one knew what kind of monster they would unleash.

      The Madeleine Fund is a good example of the pros. It was unheard of for such a huge amount of money to be raised for one child. Within days it had gone over the £1million mark, after that the transparency stopped.

      On the downside, the McCanns did not foresee that they would lose control over the information discussed online. The first discussion group they shut down was The Mirror Forum. While they could control what the tabloids published, they couldn't control how the readers responded.

      They also couldn't enforce borders where the news was concerned. It didn't take much googling to discover that the UK newspapers were telling an entirely different story to the Portuguese.

      The Establishment's assumption that the general public are stupid, is on very dodgy ground these days. We all have instant access to the truth.

      Gerry and Kate have always assumed the same (we are all stupid), and as lower beings, we should accept what we are told without question. But, as I may have said once or twice, when this case explodes, we will see whole new levels of looney toons, we have never seen before.

      I can see how being unable to control the internet must be extremely vexing for those who's need to control flies off the scale. Especially those who sit there stewing over what's said about them online. It's a great way to piss yourself off if you are especially sensitive.

      It's when you move onto retribution that it becomes a problem. I mean realistically, Gerry and Kate, would have thousands to punish. Thus far they have gone down the 'make an example' route, with national newspapers, the huge payouts the parents received, keeps all the other publications at bay. Targeting one individual online however, was a catastrophe.

      continues....

      Delete
    2. I actually feel a bit sad for Gerry and Kate that they see the internet as the enemy rather than the wonderful source of enlightenment that it is.

      Unfortunately for them, you reap what you sow, and they have had 10 years to sow lots of good seeds. They could have engaged with their supporters, on a personal level, not through a 'webmaster'.

      I'm guessing these doctors are not familiar with 'The Law of Attraction', they are not familiar with Nietzsche's concept of being responsible for yourself, so it's unlikely, and the same goes for all their advisors.

      If you give out negative energy, that is what you will get back. Bizarre as it may seem, Gerry and Kate were at their most appealing in the summer of 2007. At that time, they were giving out positive vibes. They were well groomed, well rested and full of enthusiasm. A bit of a risk no doubt, but a good marketing ploy. People dug deeper into their pockets. Their behaviour was odd, but only reflected how dignified they were.

      Naturally, they are expected to be a bit worn down after 10 years, but their constant paranoia and suspicion has driven away hundreds, if not thousands, of their supporters. It shouldn't be beneath anyone to reply to their followers (and their critics) personally. Social media is a great leveller, it separates the good guys from the pretentious twats. I have a whole new level of respect for writers, actors and artists I have admired over the years. Turns out they are just as kind and decent as I always thought they were.

      Delete
  36. The McCann case had 3 key factors which sealed their fate:

    1. The arrival of the dogs. It proved that somebody died in apartment 5A and was transported in the hired car. The pros can jump up and down until their blue in the face but even the McCanns acknowledged their reliability by trying to find other reasons why if was there ( Kate in contact with 6 dead bodies in her role as a part time GP at a health centre.
    2. The release of the files. The McCanns and their friends lied a lied and lied some more safe in the knowledge that although those who examine the statements and the various interviews where aware of all their inconsistencies and lies the great British public would buy their public bullshit. What a shock that was
    3. The evolution of the internet. They correctly guessed that by creating a story of a lost but findable little girl that the MSM would ignore the facts of the case and sell their bullshit. They did not foresee that the Information Age was changing and people no longer followed blindly the views of the MSm


    Defend them all you like pros but it like trying to turn the tide even if they are never charged or convicted of any crime they are condemned forever because of these 3 key factors

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The three areas of opinion and debate . What did the police say about point 1 ? In point 2, what have the police failed to find that the internet experts have spotted a long time ago and keep going on about ? The MSM of point 3 don't get to conduct and investigation or make arrests.The MSM is a business first and foremost and a propaganda tool second. The people who stopped blindly following the MSM quote from it more than anyone to support their theories. The Information Age is the Alt Media in the area you'e talking about. Don't kid yourself that all of that is right because it emphasises the 'alt'. A lot of it is doing what the MSM did and still do. It just costs them less to use the internet. It influences th gullible.

      ''Defend them all you like pros but it like trying to turn the tide even if they are never charged or convicted of any crime they are condemned forever because of these 3 key factors''

      Condemned by suspicion and by rumours but not arrested by to police forces who were investigating them and combing though statements and forensics. I think that's probably more accurate in terms of what's 'sealed their fate'( freedom). If you're suspicions are correct, every detective and every politician that's touched this case have lied and used the media to spread that lie. The only question that remains is why they would.

      VT

      Delete
    2. To VT
      You said: "If you're suspicions are correct, every detective and every politician that's touched this case have lied and used the media to spread that lie. The only question that remains is why they would."
      -
      No, it's not that they have lied. It's that they are disallowed to stray from the "official" narrative as dictated by the UK Government via it's MSM mouthpiece.
      The MSM and police know the Mcs are the ones they should be looking at but are in the same position as all those who knew about Savile but well aware of where their careers would end up if they expressed their observations to their BBC bosses.
      -
      SizYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    3. Like I said VT you can jump up and down all you like but:

      Point 1 proves there was a body there. Its of no evidential value in a case against the McCanns, there is no way that dogs alerting can be used as proof that the McCanns done anything to their child. However their child hasn't been seen in 10 years and the last place she was seen was in the same place that the dogs alerted to. Not enough for a conviction but the public can do the maths.

      Point 2 - They claimed shutters were broken, they changed their mind what door they used to enter and leave the apartment, they claimed keys were left on work tops, they claimed they seen a man in the darkness who they couldn't describe, then they could describe him, then their description changed overtime. Again not enough for a conviction but the public can do the maths.

      Point 3 - The information age and the evolution of the internet means we know you know. Again not enough for a conviction but the public can do the maths.

      Delete
    4. Point 1 - '' there is no way that dogs alerting can be used as proof that the McCanns done anything to their child. However their child hasn't been seen in 10 years and the last place she was seen was in the same place that the dogs alerted to. ''

      That statement could equally be used to explain the abduction hypothesis.The addition of a death having occurred(theoretically as there's been no formal statement from either police force that they're searching for a body) suggests a death but not the cause or the culprit.

      Point 3 - The public have been playing detective since long before any of us were born.From the 'from hell' letters sent to tabloids in 1888 to be more accurate.It's our natural instinct to work puzzles out. in 2017 the initial list of the 'obvious' jack The Ripper has gone from 3 to around 30 and is still growing. A similar phenomenon occurred following the murder of JFK.Lady Di, Jill Dando are still theorised and discussed to the same end via the 'Information Superhighway'. It means little. All the digital age has added is the medium for thousands to talk to each other a lot faster. It hasn't made the public any the wiser since 1888.Just louder and less patient.Plus of course they can say a lot of things from behind a mask they wouldn't say on camera to reporters.The public have an impressive record of adding two and two and coming up with seven.So, let's hope they improve their ability to 'so the maths' one day soon.

      Murder and abduction are the same today as over a century ago. Police have far more sophisticated tools of investigation at their disposal today. Why can't ( or won't?) the detectives investigating this case 'do the maths' ?

      VT

      Delete
    5. Anonymous22 September 2017 at 10:18

      SizYearsInaComaMan

      ''No, it's not that they have lied. It's that they are disallowed to stray from the "official" narrative as dictated by the UK Government via it's MSM mouthpiece.''

      But isn't that another way of saying that they lied ? 'Disallowed to step outside their preferred lines of investigation' ? It's also suggesting that the Government have tampered with this case in order to protect a suspect they know is guilty.Yet nobody will talk 'cover up'.

      ''The MSM and police know the Mcs are the ones they should be looking at but are in the same position as all those who knew about Savile but well aware of where their careers would end up if they expressed their observations to their BBC bosses.''

      The MSM and police may know that they have to fake an investigation but not necessarily why. Savile had a lot of high ranking members of various Police Forces and politicians in his pocket as he knew who had covered up child abuse at the highest level.He was dangerous not only to them, but had he ever have been arrested he was threatening to bring them down with him.He had as much power and more than those at the top.This explains why Savile had to be looked after.The McCanns were two doctors in 2007, not celebrities with endless contacts in the seedier corners of showbiz and politics . What do they have to bribe or blackmail the politicians with for the latter to give them water tight protection and endless funding ?

      VT

      Delete
    6. Anon 22 Sept 16.03

      "What do they have to bribe or blackmail the politicians with for the latter to give them water tight protection and endless funding?"

      GM was involved with COMARE, a Government Committee which monitors radiation in the environment.

      How and why did he get a place on that Committee and what did he learn and hear from being on the Committee?

      Delete
    7. Anonymous22 September 2017 at 17:42

      Interesting points. I'm aware of the GM connections to Brown and Brown's brother and the research . But you're answering my question with questions. What do you think he knew or what they were doing ? I'm guessing you believe that something sinister was afoot in that area. I tend to go with that. Not because of GM but because it's politicians.Whatever it was-if indeed it was anything- it must be really big and really dangerous( national security's MI didn't just fly to PDL for an impromptu jolly )for so many to risk so much by conspiring to fake an investigation via the police while covertly concealing a crime and a body.

      VT

      Delete
  37. Information for Ros:
    http://www.anorak.co.uk/173233/madeleine-mccann/madeleine-mccann-watching-the-parents.html/#disqus_thread

    Article dated 10/05/2007 - there were 2209 comments.

    Must have been a bloody big water cooler!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You do know 'round the water cooler' is a marketing expression, right?

      Not surprised at the number, in June 2007, people were talking about the Madeleine case EVERYWHERE. Not just in the UK, but around the globe. Mostly because the parents' behaviour was so strange.

      Delete
    2. @ Ros 00:28
      "people were talking about the Madeleine case EVERYWHERE. Not just in the UK, but around the globe. Mostly because the parents' behaviour was so strange."

      And you know that because of the internet and comments on the internet - just as the German reporter did.

      Delete
    3. "Not surprised at the number, in June 2007"

      The article I linked to was 10 May 2007 - not June.

      Delete
    4. Thank you for the correction 09:20. In May 2007 of course, talk about missing Madeleine was at fever pitch, and already a lot of people were expressing doubts.

      Delete
  38. Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton22 September 2017 at 00:28

    ''You do know 'round the water cooler' is a marketing expression, right?''

    Marketing what exactly ? 'Water cooler talk' is an idiom used informally in place of idle gossip.People on work breaks 'catch up' around the proverbial water cooler . I suppose it's used appropriately in the context of the post.After all, 95% of 'comment sections' and online sleuthing is exactly that.Gossip.

    ''Not surprised at the number, in June 2007, people were talking about the Madeleine case EVERYWHERE. Not just in the UK, but around the globe. Mostly because the parents' behaviour was so strange.''

    Yes, that's realistic. The image of an adoreable and innocent little girl who had disappeared and had been seen on every front page and TV screen around the globe had people excalaiming 'oh God-her parents are really strange''.

    VT

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That's exactly what people were saying VT - you can't change the past while there are people alive who remember it.

      Gerry and Kate's massive advertising campaign was a first. The world had never seen parents of a missing child, being so proactive. No-one knows how much was raised for the Madeleine Fund, but we know it went into millions and it was all for one child and one family.

      That's strange behaviour VT, as was opening an online shop, registering their daughter's name as a trademark and running a separate investigation to the police. (note, they haven't tried that with SY). And of course, a negative publicity campaign against the Portuguese police.

      Though staging an abduction is not unique VT, the huge circus the McCanns created has never been done before. Of course it was strange. As one of Gerry and Kate's advisors warned them, THEY would become the story, and they did.

      You have created some strange fantasy world VT, where everyone would have believed Gerry and Kate if it hadn't been for Goncalo Amaral. As if the watching world couldn't see what he and the rest of the PJ saw.

      Delete
    2. Should add, it was also very strange that doctors, 6 of them, left very tiny children alone in holiday apartments while they went out for dinner.

      Delete
    3. Ros 11.25

      "That's exactly what people were saying VT - you can't change the past while there are people alive who remember it."

      You can't change the past - too true.

      The thing that has stuck in my mind since 3 May 2007 is the fact that Kate McCann walked the twins to the restaurant for breakfast a day or two afer Madeleine's "disappearance" - because she wanted to keep things as normal as possible for them, yet there were many, many TV people with cameras and flashing light bulbs on the grass in front of the restaurant whilst the twins stood looking at them holding KM's hand. I thought at the time "is this woman insane, how can that be normal for the twins?" It was enough to give them nightmares and put them off ever going there again for breakfast, did she not have any compassion for the twins at that moment, good grief, talk about being insensitive and completely oblivious as to the way she was perceived in those few minutes - no self awareness as mentioned before. Just me, me, me, all the time.

      Not to mention putting the twins back in the creche, not knowing who was responsible for Madeleine's "disappearance", that was another thing which rang alarm bells. She could have been putting them back in the care of the person who was holding Madeleine, but of course if she knew there was no abductor then she had nothing to worry about, just getting the twins off her hands as per usual with the McCanns so they could enjoy "me" time.

      Ros 11.27

      "Should add, it was also very strange that doctors, 6 of them, left very tiny children alone in holiday apartments while they went out for dinner."

      We only have the Tapas 9 statements that the children were left alone in the holiday apartments, didn't GA say that he believed they were all together in one apartment hence one adult being absent from the dinner table each night, probably keeping an eye on the children on the pretence of being ill.

      Sorry to keep repeating stuff that has been mentioned numerous times but it seems that many of the McCanns support group seem to have wiped much of this from their memories.

      Delete
    4. ''You have created some strange fantasy world VT, where everyone would have believed Gerry and Kate if it hadn't been for Goncalo Amaral. As if the watching world couldn't see what he and the rest of the PJ saw.''

      Amaral was removed.Therefore, he was powerless to do anything from that moment.What excuse do the rest of the PJ have for doing nothing.

      Delete
    5. Anon 15.24

      "What excuse do the rest of the PJ have for doing nothing."

      The PJ hit a brick wall when the McCanns and their Tapas friends refused to co-operate in the disappearance of a 3 year old child, yes, the disappearance of a 3 year old in case you'd forgotten, they should all hang their heads in shame, what about Madeleine the lot of you? Do you not think about her every day, every hour of every day, are all you all so up your own ar*es that she means nothing?

      However, the Portuguese Courts have spoken on behalf of Madeleine when they said that the McCanns "have not been cleared".

      Delete
    6. The PJ could still have arrested them if they had what they needed, brick wall or not.Suspects and conspirators aren't let go just because they refuse to cooperate.If anything, that suggests guilt and should spur the police forward. The 'have not been cleared' is dead in the water.It's been ten years out in the real world.

      Delete
    7. Anon 17.38

      Suspects and conspirators are let go all the time, as you are probably well aware of, however it doesn't mean that they've been forgotten about and are not on the police radar for future investigation. It just means there isn't enough information to hold them.

      "Not been cleared" is not dead in the water, it means "not been cleared", and therefore those "not being cleared" are still in the sights of the police investigation, whether 10 years on or 10 months on. Is that too hard to comprehend?

      Delete
    8. ''Suspects and conspirators are let go all the time.. It just means there isn't enough information to hold them.''

      I can't think of many when the crime is the suspected killing, burying or abducting of a 3 yr old. It's true that, routinely, those closest to the victim are questioned to eliminate them from inquiries or arrest them. It's also true that many of those are re-arrested not long after when evidence collected or forensics tie them to the crime.But id there isn't strong evidence in the first place they can't be strong suspects.They gather strength together. The courts don't investigate, the police do. If the police eliminated them from their inquiries and haven't changed that in ten years, the court's 'not cleared' means nothing. If we're to hold on to that line then Murat was brought in twice as many times as a suspect so why is he cleared ? Or the other 'known to the police' suspects who were also released without charge.

      ''
      therefore those "not being cleared" are still in the sights of the police investigation, whether 10 years on or 10 months on. Is that too hard to comprehend?''

      see above.



      Delete
    9. Anonymous22 September 2017 at 13:32

      ''Sorry to keep repeating stuff that has been mentioned numerous times but it seems that many of the McCanns support group seem to have wiped much of this from their memories.''

      Your concern about 'beating' the -in your words - 'support group' is clouding your view of what is important. In this case it would be the question of who wiped these 'facts' from the PJ's memory ? They read the statements before the online detective club did.

      Delete
  39. ** Things that might have endeared the Mcs more with the public **
    They could have physically searched whilst others were, instead of jogging or playing tennis.
    They could have said on TV "Don't do what we did - don't ever leave your kids alone when dining out."
    They could have made direct appeals to "the abductor" more than the once.
    They could have spoken to MBM directly to camera.
    They could have answered all questions they were asked.
    They could have desisted from their constant denigrating the Portuguese police and Portugal.
    They could have utilised the fund money better - they turned off so many when they used it to pay two mortgage payments.
    They could have shown a tad more compassion by not saying: "The situation she finds herself in", "If she came to any harm why would that be our fault?" (Paraphrased)
    They made MBM Ward of Court - what kind of signal does that give?!!
    They really shouldn't have stated that we all leave our kids like they did which annoyed every parent on the planet.
    They made the "abduction" into a Ltd Company with rapier like haste, that is, they made MBM into a business commodity retail outlet.
    Most of all, they could have accepted at least some responsibility for MBM going missing instead of blaming everyone else.
    And if you want to talk about hate then look no further than what Kate says about Goncalo.
    -
    SixYearsInAComaMan

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Poetry in motion SYIACM! I used to think it was 'oh a tree in motion', I have no idea why, it makes no sense, lol.

      What a shame Gerry didn't have that pinned to his white board and his wider agenda SYIACM! Things could have been so different.

      I won't go down the whole psychological route just yet, but these doctors have got more than their fair share of the God Complex. Their sense of entitlement is staggering, they have no humility whatsoever.

      If they had done just one, or more, of the suggestions you list SYIAC, things could have been so different. Their facebook page could have been filled with genuine friends and supporters who would be fighting their corner now.

      Delete
    2. Hi Ros.
      Spooky! I too thought it was 'oh a tree in motion' much like I thought 'stock in trade' was 'stocking trade' as in flogging hose lol.
      But as you say, if they'd displayed the rather more expected sentient human touch they we would all have remained sympathetic. It was noted very early on that they were both very aggressive, aloof and entitled which endeared them to no one.
      Many medical consultants think they are God so that came as no surprise with Gerry. But what of Kate? She too shows all the empathetic humanity of a house brick. All I can say is that by being married they spared two other people a life of abject misery.
      -
      SixYearsInaComaMan

      Delete
    3. Anonymous22 September 2017 at 09:00

      ''They could have said on TV "Don't do what we did - don't ever leave your kids alone when dining out."

      Kate McCann has launched a campaign with Missing People to help other families with lost loved ones.

      ''They could have made direct appeals to "the abductor" more than the once.They could have spoken to MBM directly to camera.''

      It was decided by SY that any abductor would -or could- get pleasure from seeing the suffering and it wouldn't be a good idea.

      ''They could have answered all questions they were asked.''

      They had been advised by their legal team what to answer and what to ignore. It's never too late to change the questions to more pertinent ones though.

      ''They could have shown a tad more compassion by not saying: "The situation she finds herself in", "If she came to any harm why would that be our fault?" (Paraphrased)''

      KM : ''We've let her down'' ( repeated loudly and publicly).

      ''They made MBM Ward of Court - what kind of signal does that give?!!''

      For what reason ? Source ?

      ''Most of all, they could have accepted at least some responsibility for MBM going missing instead of blaming everyone else''


      Who is this 'everyone else' that they have blamed ?

      ''And if you want to talk about hate then look no further than what Kate says about Goncalo.''

      What did he say to anger her ?


      Delete
  40. Ros: "Should add, it was also very strange that doctors, 6 of them, left very tiny children alone in holiday apartments while they went out for dinner".

    But they DIDN'T. That was only the cover story. You will search in vain for any independent evidence that they were doing all this checking on the other nights.

    It seems all changed after Sunday. After then, they stopped going down to breakfast with the others. They switched to having lunch in their apartment. They took no more photos (we can't count the pool photo). They switched to dining at the Tapas after Sunday. Then there is that very strange 'Make-Up' photo which now looks as though it was taken in Praia da Luz. I have to give it to Clarence and the others who cooked up the idea that they were leaving the children every night. An out-and-out lie.

    But a very cunning one. It has worked a treat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @
      Anonymous22 September 2017 at 14:59

      You can prove this cover story can you, or at least cite the movie you found it in. What relevance does where they ate,or what they ate , have in relation to an abduction, accidental death or killing ? What's the pool photo YOU have decided can be ignored ? What's 'strange' about the photo of a little girl in her mum's make up ? Why does it 'now look like' it was taken in PDL ? Even if it was, what's wrong about that ? Is there proof of CM lying about the checking on the children or does it just fit your weird fantasy ?

      Delete
  41. Anon 14.59

    "It seems all changed after Sunday. After then, they stopped going down to breakfast with the others."

    Referring back to my post of 13.32 I was going to add another post regarding the breakfasts but got waylaid on other things. I did say that KM took the twins to breakfast immediately after Madeleine "disappeared" because she wanted their routines to carry on as usual but then I remembered after posting that that their breakfast regime changed after the Sunday to the McCanns having breakfast in their apartment every morning. Obviously KM was not aware when putting the twins in front of the TV cameras going to breakfast that every word she uttered would be scrutinised by all and sundry for the next 10 years and every discrepancy found in the statements made by the T9 would be dissected ad infinitum. The twins were only 18 months old, I doubt they wouldn't have cared where they had breakfast so why lie, was it just another photo shoot to garner sympathy from the public having the twins on display on the pretence that it was "taking them to breakfast as was their usual routine".

    And as you mention "the leaving the kids every night on their own" was a cunning plan to make people think of "neglect", the lesser of two evils - neglect charges or manslaughter charges?


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This latest cluedo game...

      are we offering any explanations for independent witnesses who seem to support the idea that the children were left alone ? There was some couple( can't recall names) who saw Madeleine alone in the apartment alone.Then there's Mrs Fenn's statements. Do we have to label her a liar too now, God rest her.

      Delete
  42. Anonymous at 17:21
    'KM: "We've let her down" ( repeated loudly and publicly).'

    What about the twins?

    A question Kate McCann wouldn't answer:

    Assuming Madeleine was abducted, why did you leave the twins to go to the 'Tapas' and raise the alarm? The supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous22 September 2017 at 21:27

      Anonymous at 17:21

      'KM: "We've let her down" ( repeated loudly and publicly).'
      What about the twins?''

      The twins were seen asleep-so still there.

      ''Assuming Madeleine was abducted, why did you leave the twins to go to the 'Tapas' and raise the alarm? The supposed abductor could still be in the apartment.''

      According to Kate's recollection of the event, she paused in the living room, she checked the children's room.She then checked her own bedroom to see if Madeleine had wondered into there.I think it's safe to assume that during that panic, Madeleine would have made a noise or come to her mother. In that brief panic and look around, which rooms or what room did she miss ? And why couldn't Madeleine hear her and call ? It was a small apartment and it was in silence. It wasn't a sprawling mansion. Don't tell me the abductor could have been hidden in a wardrobe and the 'feisty' little Madeleine wouldn't be kicking out.

      It's easy to sit in the comfort of your own home and ponder this and that at a computer.To be in a situation like that is another story. A foreign village, late at night and a child's vanished. You don't have time to sit and ponder this and that you panic.You run for help.It's instinct to get all hands on deck fast.

      Delete