Tuesday, 28 November 2017



I am told by many sources, including those that do know, that Nigel Nessling is not Muratfan.  Apologies.  I wrote this blog in the wee small hours, and a skim read of Nessling's website and the cesspit.  As I mentioned, the characters of the more vitriolic trolls are of little interest to me.  While their true characters usually do reveal something sinister and murky, they lack depth, all roads lead to pathetic, socially inept creeps crying out for attention.  They are a sideshow to the main event.

Anyway, I am happy to be corrected, and hope it doesn't detract from the blog's main theme.  Muratfan, Greenink (?), Vee8, Tigerloaf, BB1, Jayelles, Wicatty, Michael Walker etc, they all have the same agenda, the same message, and usually, the same words.  It's as though they are all reading from the same script.  There is no individuality, there is no 'face' of Team McCann, because none of them are willing to reveal the true identities behind the monsters they have created. 

Nigel Nessling, Vee8, I suspect, is the beginning of the endgame.  He may be on the periphery, an outer domino, but that's how endgames usually begin.


Many thanks to posters at 10:33 and 15:36 on my last blog.  Well, well, well!

I have never taken too much notice of the pro McCann trolls on social media, remiss of me, perhaps, but their identities have never particularly interested me. Whenever, or however, they are exposed, the result will be sad. On many levels. 

This, however, for me is a revelation, it kind of confirms something I have always suspected. You see I DO think child pornography is involved, which at this point may confuse some of my regular readers, but bear with me.  I don't believe it is involved in the same way as Bennett, and those freaks in the cesspit putting family snaps under a microscope.

Let me explain, via the bigger picture.  In the olden days - last century, homosexuality was a criminal offence.  For men at least, Queen Victoria didn't think women did that sort of thing.  I don't know the exact laws that applied, but I do know that being exposed as a homosexual could lead to imprisonment and being cast out of society.  In a nutshell it could lead to ruination.  Obviously this put a lot of rich and powerful men in constant fear of blackmail and of course corruption.  Politicians for example, could be forced to forced to pass bills, Judges could be forced to let criminals off.

Fortunately, those days are long gone, but the internet opens up all sorts of avenues for the same kind of bribery and corruption.  That is people who are 'caught' with material of a dubious nature on their computers are open not only to prosecution but to the same kind of social disgrace as those who were exposed as homosexuals in the 1950's.  That is if they are found to have, or suspected of having, dubious material on their computers, they can bribed, corrupted and forced into doing things they don't want to do, for fear of being exposed. 

I can't define material of a dubious nature, because it's not something I have any knowledge of, I don't know how porn is categorised and I don't think I want to.  And in that I a not alone, it is a subject, most of us don't want to think about.  But we should be concerned.  In this climate of fear, taking pictures of your child in a Nativity Play is almost a criminal act.  And of course most underage images exchanged online are teens sending selfies to other teens.  I read of one 18 year old being prosecuted for sending an underage picture of herself to herself.  Whilst the whole subject is so blurry, almost anyone could be subject to a dawn raid and having their computers seized.

But what has brought this subject to the fore, is the unmasking of Nigel Nessling. no blurring of the lines or room for doubt in his case.  That he is now officially a creep comes as no surprise, he is a nasty, prolific troll who patrolled social media under the screenname of Vee8.  A name that sends a shudder through every McCann sceptic who has ever encountered him.  He was the scourge of the 'antis', the hammer of the disbelievers, the thug, who's job it was to patrol social media and scare away anyone who questioned the McCann's abduction story. 

It is impossible to separate him the notorious Myths' sites, and of course the notorious group who compiled the dossier that led to Brenda Leyland's death. For those not familiar with the 'Dossier' it was for many years the foundation of a pro McCann website called Exposing the Myths.  A public website, that named, shamed, and put up photographs of anyone on Facebook or in the forums who did not believe the McCanns.  Facebook pages were raided for pictures of family, and employers were contacted.  It was, effectively a Blacklist, designed to destroy the lives and careers of everyone they named. They had over a 100 pages on me!  It was all deleted following Brenda's death. 

The behaviour of the pro McCann supporters is something that has gone completely unnoticed by the mainstream media, and more recently, by that group of academics who studied the McCann twitter hashtag.  It has also been ignored by the parents of Madeleine themselves, who have never made any attempt to distance themselves from the sheer thuggery of those who profess to support them.  For that reason, the McCanns now find themselves in the very awkward position of their greatest supporter being convicted of making and owning images of the 'highest category'.  It is the 'making' part that disturbs me, how on earth did he not get a prison sentence? From the scant information available, there are no blurred lines about holiday snaps, he is clearly guilty, and given the 'quantity', it wasn't a new hobby.

Of course, the McCanns can't be blamed for the lunatics who support them, but they have always had the power to say, that is not what we represent, pack it in.  They haven't of course, because they knew they faced a social media war from Day, and they are finishers.  There was no word of remorse, regret or sympathy following the death of Brenda Leyland either. 

Yet another stick to beat Gerry and Kate with, I hear my critics cry, yes it is, and one I hesitated to use but then I think, what if Nessling had been an 'anti', or, which would have been manna from heaven for them, a supporter of Goncalo Amaral?  They would have been on the phone to every media outlet and tabloid editor in their overflowing contacts lists.  Stop the Press.

The 'antis' do of course, have more than their own fair share of creeps and lunatics, but that's almost a given.  Unfortunately, all those of us who didn't believe the McCanns for sane reasons, came to be represented in the media by the ugly mug and fire and brimstone preaching of Tony Bennett. I always wondered how it so quickly became taboo to doubt the McCanns, but the answer was there all the time.  We had all been tarred with the same ugly, hate filled brush. 

Nigel Nessling, was quite clearly, a nasty, malicious sociopath, (how did the academics miss that?).  His behaviour was borderline criminal, so why was such a deeply unpleasant character part of the McCann media monitoring team?  And he must have been, because they have never condemned his behaviour.  How did he become involved in the Madeleine case? And in light of these recent revelations, do they not find it a tad creepy that a man like that should be so interested in their missing 3 year old daughter?

I question why Nigel Nessling didn't get a prison sentence, but the questioning doesn't stop there.  How long was he abusing children, and if he was making the images, then the abuse is not in doubt. How did he fly under the radar of CEOP, who given their speciality, must at some point have investigated those with an obsessional interest in the Madeleine case. Ok, fair dues, too many of us, but Muratfan stood out and he was promoting their own Minute for Madeleine* campaign (the one with the Indian Maddie) and selling their message, he would never have got past FBI profilers.  Regardless, this is hugely embarrassing for the McCanns, will they distance themselves from him now? 


Sunday, 19 November 2017


Following on from my last blog, and the reasons why this case remains unsolved, Clarence Mitchell I think, deserves a special mention.   
The appointment of Clarence Mitchell as Government Spokesman, is unique I think, in crimes involving British citizens abroad, please correct me if I am wrong, but I have never heard of it before.  I'm not applying sinister reasons on the part of the Government, I expect it was something the very assertive Gerry and Kate asked for when Tony Blair asked if there was anything they could do. 
However, the appointment of a spokesman from the Government to speak on behalf of the family, gave the impression that the British government deemed them innocent and approved of their campaigns and fundraising.  Clarence (government spokesman) made it clear when he said, 'just put the money in brown envelopes and send it to Rothley'.  True, he may not have been a government spokesman at that particular time, but in the eyes of most of the world, he was.  
Helping or hindering the Search?
Clarence has a gift, and that gift is being able to  lie with as many teeth as he has in his mouth. (Carlos Anjos) while coming across as the voice of authority.  He is the go-between,  the Official in 'the know', he speaks for those too important to speak to the rabble themselves.  His first move, was to put a barrier between the press and his clients, a barrier that elevated them not only above suspicion, but too classy to mix with the press, and too dignified to respond to awkward questions.  He turned them from ordinary people into VIPs who's time was worth lots of cash.  How about a bikini pic Kate?  Gerry and Kate enjoyed all the flattery, I'm sure, Gerry especially, who was positively beaming when photographed on the Whitehouse lawn.

Gerry and Clarence undoubtedly clicked.  I'm guessing there was a bonding session as they flew out to PDL together.  Not quite the mile high club, but a bromance based on shared dreams.  Both are narcissistically blown away by their ability to deceive others.  Clarence stayed out in PDL for 3 months, being paid for presumably, by the government.  But who was he taking his instructions from?  The Home Office or the family?  Was he being paid by the British government to smear the Portuguese police and judiciary?  Why did the McCanns even have a government spokesman?

I believe he started working for the McCanns personally, around September 2007, when they were made arguidos.  Who can forget how he stood outside the McCanns' Rothley home, with Gerry and Kate trembling in the background, as he read out a statement on their behalf.It was a staged affair, reminiscent of those sheepish interviews given by politicians on a Sunday morning, while we read vivid allegations about them in the News of the World.

Man in control of hair
Clarence's greatest gift is his ability to .sound as if he has got everything under control.  However, his physical appearance, screams, I can't even get my hair right anymore.  In the early days, when his hair was much more manageable, he was far more confident and dogmatic.  All the events he organised, the press conferences, meeting the Pope, came across to the public, as having an official seal of approval from the UK government, even if it didn't.  The line between who he was actually working for, is very blurred.
Man freed from wind tunnel

Many I think, especially the headline skimmers, took the constant presence of Clarence, as being a sign the authorities did not believe Gerry and Kate were involved in their daughter's disappearance.   And Clarence's gift for sounding important, and making his clients sound important, took this deception a long way.  What would we have thought of Karen Matthews for example, if she had had an official government spokesman? Maybe, if the authorities believe her, so should we?

Changing public perception isn't a crime, nor should it be, advertisers, politicians and bloggers would be out of business.  It was Clarence's job, to make the public think kindly of his clients, and he was prepared to go to any lengths to achieve it.  Whether he should have been funded by the Foreign Office to do this, is another question.  


Wednesday, 15 November 2017


Last night I watched a very sad documentary about the murder of teenager Becky Watts, by her stepbrother and his girlfriend.

Initially 16 year old Becky was reported missing, and at 16 there was every chance that Becky could have been targeted by a predator online, but unlike the case of 3 year old Madeleine McCann, there was no intervention by the Child Exploitation and Online Protection agency. 

In fact, all the criticism that has been hurled at the Portuguese police for their handling of Madeleine's disappearance could apply to the British police searching for Becky.  The borders weren't closed, the crime scene wasn't sealed off, and a lot of evidence could be said to have been lost.

But there is no criticism, nor should there be, because kids go missing for all sorts of reasons, there is very rarely a need to call for an international search within the first few hours, if at all.  Most searches are concentrated on the area where the child disappeared, and for good reason.  Not only is stranger abduction 1 in a zillion rare, stealing a child to take out of the country is rarer still.  Other than in the case of Madeleine McCann, I have never heard of parents of a missing child taking their search global.  In the weeks following Madeleine's disappearance, they were travelling to Morocco and Europe, and Gerry even flew out to Washington.  I've never heard of parents of a missing child doing that either.

The parents of poor Becky, were not so proactive.  They were devastated.  They left the investigation to the police and they co-operated throughout.  They didn't have a spokesman, they didn't have teams of lawyers, and they didn't patent their daughter's name and open an online shop.  All of which the McCanns achieved within the first 3 weeks, roughly the same amount of time it took for Bristol police to arrest Becky's killers.

The behaviour of the McCanns, was seen as heroic by many, not only were they not going to give up on their daughter, but they were fighting for missing children everywhere.  The rest of us  (and the PJ) however, were saying WTF?
The favourite reprimand was, and probably still is, 'no-one knows how they would behave in such circumstances'.  Well yeh, actually we do, and it wouldn't be like that. 

Gerry and Kate are, as we know, mad as hell at the Portuguese police for not finding their missing daughter.  The original investigation is described in the British press as bungled and incompetent, a myth invented by Team McCann that took wings.  But did the PJ respond any differently to police the world over?  I'm going with No, because the majority of children are found within the first few hours and the tabloids would be spattered daily with pictures of kids who forgot what time it was. 

As for the crime scene.  When the first police arrived Gerry, Kate and their friends had already solved the mystery of Madeleine's disappearance.  She had been taken by a stranger abductor who was probably going to take her out of the country.  For them, there were no other options, and no optimistic ones either, because Kate wanted a priest. 

The father of Becky, wouldn't and couldn't, give up hope that she was still alive, like most of us, he envisaged scenarios where she would be rescued, accepting her death, devastated him.  Of course by the following day, Gerry and Kate found that 'hope', but they were still going with the worst thing that could possibly happen, abduction by a stranger, or worse, abduction by paedophiles or people traffickers.  No thoughts of finding her with a kindly neighbour, or sleeping under a bush, no grasping at straws that she might be close by.

I can only imagine the reaction of the first police who arrived at the scene, on being told a child had disappeared, how it happened (through the open window) and she had been taken by a stranger abductor.  Case solved.  'Now off you go and close the borders, we've got a press conference in the morning'.  It would be like a cardiac patient telling Gerry where the left ventricle is. 

The mystery of Becky's disappearance quickly unravelled after specialist police dogs discovered tiny traces of blood on the doorframe of Becky's bedroom, barely visible to the eye, someone had tried to clean up, but the dogs found it anyway.  Within days the killers were arrested.

In the case of Madeleine McCann, bringing in the specialist dogs also led to a change in direction of the police investigation and the even bigger thorn in the parents' side, the alerts of the blood and cadaver dogs.  They have, and probably always will, deny that the dogs alerted to anything - preferring to smear the dogs and their handler, rather than accept their expertise.  In any event, it brought the police search for a live Maddie to an end.  

No matter what Gerry, Kate and their supporters say about specialist police dogs, time and time again, their findings go on to be proved correct.  The McCanns argue 1) there was no blood, or 2) it wasn't Maddie's, 3) if Madeleine had an accident and bled in the apartment, why would that be their fault? 4) people on social media should not be allowed to use the word blood.  Amazingly, with the use of the repetitive chant 'there's no evidence', Gerry and Kate were able to convince a large section of society, that the biggest clue as to Madeleine's fate, those barking dogs, was meaningless.  That those experienced dogs, with 100% track records, were wrong on this occasion (11 times) is absurd, but that's how easy it is to sell a lie. 

More amazingly still, Gerry and Kate managed to convince (that same) large section of society, that they were the victims of an incompetent, third world police force, who were trying to blame them [the parents] so they could get back to their boozy 4 hour lunches.  I find it chilling, that Gerry and Kate were able to spread their hatred of the Portuguese police and Goncalo Amaral in particular, throughout the UK.  And the glee with which some presenters and journalists latched onto the McCanns' prejudice revealed much about their own characters. 

The killers of Becky Watts weren't very clever.  They didn't delete their texts, they didn't clean up properly, and they didn't write out timelines so their stories matched.  And I doubt they could afford expensive lawyers who would have told them to stop talking 

But, more importantly, the loving parents of Becky, didn't undermine the police by contacting the press and launching a publicity campaign. The idea I am sure, would have been hideous to them, as it would, to most parents who have lost a child. The thing is, no matter how hard you try, the actions of Madeleine's parents do not fall within the parameters of 'normal' behaviour, in fact, they were batshit crazy, or should that be crazy like a fox?  Taking the search away from PDL, was all part of the strategy.  So too, encouraging fruitloops worldwide to jam the police switchboards.  Confusion is good, said Gerry. 

So what put a halt to the original investigation into Madeleine's disappearance?  In the majority of unsolved crimes, when the dogs alert, the police are then on a home run.  In this case, the opposite happened, the investigation hit a brick wall.  The witnesses stopped co-operating with the police.  The case was shelved.

For Team McCann, Madeleine was again alive and findable, and anyone using the words, death, blood or dogs, would find themselves in the dock.  Those pesky dogs may have cost Gerry and Kate, the support of the Vatican and a few hundred thousand supporters, but they were able to restart the campaign, as victims, not only of an abductor, but of the Portuguese police and the British press.  I always wondered what they said to DCI Redwood or indeed any of the officers from Operation Grange, when asked about the dogs.  But, silly me, they were  never asked.  Not because OG are incompetent, but because the only witnesses who can solve this puzzle have been lawyered up since 2007.

When we look back on this case, and the looking back is not that far away, it will be in wonderment that a small group of people were able to create and perpetuate such an almighty whopper, it's almost as if Goebbels himself lent a helping hand.  Many will be squirming, and so they should be, perhaps asking themselves 'was I  a fool to believe two British suspects' over a foreign police force?'. 

Goncalo Amaral is right, at some point the world will know The Truth of the Lie, and that day is drawing nearer.  The recent revelation that the McCanns and the Tapas group have not given further statements to the British police is a game changer, they are clearly not co-operating with the police as we were led to believe. 

Looking at the speed with which the killers of Becky Watts were arrested, and the 10+ years that have passed since the disappearance of Madeleine, there is one element that stands out above all others.  That is, maybe parents of a missing child should not be encouraged and indeed funded, to create a travelling circus and sabotage a police investigation.  Most of course, have the dignity and good taste not to, and there is no need for legislation, this is a one off, lessons have been learned, we hope.  Most notably, the difference between a missing child investigation being solved within a month, or one that we are all supposed to call a mystery 10+ years later. 

Saturday, 4 November 2017


'If Ros publishes anymore posts from you saying there was blood spatter up the walls...............  I will report Ros to every authority I can to have this blog closed down and for Ros to be taken to Court'.

And there we have it folks, another glimpse of Team McCann's heavy handed threats to silence those who don't believe the abduction story. 

Though I have come under many attacks from Team McCann over the years, they have not been able to accuse me of inciting hate, or any other legal violation that would land me in the dock. One, because  it is not in my nature, and two, I am a published author who knows exactly how a 'legal reading' works.  Three, I'm not attention seeking like Bennett, and Four, I'm not stupid. 

The problem the poster on the last blog has, is the mention of blood spatter on the walls.  Specifically, the use of the word 'blood', which apparently if referred to as an unknown body fluid, gets the McCanns off the hook.  The sane among us, can of course see the snowball in hell analogy - as if playing semantics will delete all those images of yellow post-its on the walls, curtains and sofa we have all seen in the police files.  It reminds me of an iconic scene in Dallas, when Sue-Ellen catches JR in bed with another woman.  'Do I believe you or my lying eyes' she yells.  Quite.

I am an intelligent, educated woman 'Unknown', not only do I stand by my words, I am proud of them - unlike yourself, who hides behind anonymity to issue bullying threats.   My blog is not libellous, nor is it a vendetta against the McCanns - I am the only forum that hosts both sides of the argument. 

What are you going to get me in the dock for Unknown?  Not censoring posts that give an unfavourable image of the McCanns?  Is this still a reputation thing, or have you moved onto arguments for the Defence?  It wasn't blood M'lud.

*Seinfeld fans will recognise the soup Nazi,  No soup for you!