tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post1548830417950247691..comments2024-02-04T19:08:45.476+00:00Comments on CRISTOBELL UNDECIDED: MONEY FOR A RAINY DAYRosalinda Huttonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comBlogger127125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-81270844154322576572019-02-05T19:33:06.976+00:002019-02-05T19:33:06.976+00:00So Scotland yard are keeping the truth a secret ? ...So Scotland yard are keeping the truth a secret ? That's a serious allegation.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-33236199213704246002019-02-05T19:26:34.158+00:002019-02-05T19:26:34.158+00:00Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 23:...Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 23:12<br /><br />''I hoped it was from someone other than Ziggy, or even a female Ziggy with whom I might connect. But, alas no, tis yourself again lol.''<br /><br />You could connect with a male ziggy if you allowed your eyes to open.But, you have your stubborn reasons...<br /><br />''You didn't suspect the parents, because they were in company and abroad. LOL, how very 'Mrs Bucket'. Being 'in company' doesn't add respectability,''<br /><br />True.But it dramatically increases your chances of being caught for committing a crime.At home, you're behind closed doors.On holiday you're surrounded by eyes and you don't know the area.And if you go there in a group that makes it even more likely you won't get away with anything unless you're all involved.<br /><br />''Second para, now you want to pin me down to providing links etc which is a game I will not play.''<br /><br />I wouldn't ask for links.I know you don't provide them and I know you'd struggle to find any. Most of what you say is just your own suspicion rather than factual.I'd settle for you just saying who it was that went on record saying that there was evidence of a clean up.There have been enough detectives on the case, somebody must have if you're so certain.I was prepared to find the link myself once you had told me.<br /><br />'' Let's just say, blood found beneath a floor tile, suggests it's source from the upper level was cleaned up''<br /><br />Suggests to who ? People miles away at a computer or detectives at the crime scene ?<br /><br />''I don't know why you are pushing for a forensics argument, it really doesn't help your cause.''<br /><br />Somebody has to. Forensics close cases.They're important.It's the cause of the detectives that it helps, not mine.What has anyone made of them ?<br /><br />''Finally, I think 'slathering wolves' is a tad harsh. What an odd way to describe those who do not believe the McCanns' abduction tale.''<br /><br />True.But it was a generalisation.laziness on my part.It's generally true that those who don't believe it don't stop at that. They exchange online ideas about how the parents did it, how cold they are, how cruel and twisted, how they set up a fraudulent fund and laundered money. How they controlled police, politicians and the media.You know the type of nonsense....<br /><br />''You would have to be a complete moron to think they have been telling the truth.''<br /><br />So how many 'complete morons' have been on a salary for 12 years here and in Portugal ?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-87371819124497903422019-02-05T13:59:45.546+00:002019-02-05T13:59:45.546+00:00Anonymous5 February 2019 at 08:20
Given all the c...Anonymous5 February 2019 at 08:20<br /><br />Given all the certainty and all your indisputable facts i have 2 questions for you :<br /><br />1 : Why haven't the PJ made an arrest ?<br /><br />2: Why haven't the met made an arrest ? After all, OG have been looking at what you've just seen for years.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-33771582197930501132019-02-05T08:20:03.717+00:002019-02-05T08:20:03.717+00:00the evidence is in place, especially the forensics...the evidence is in place, especially the forensics. Even we the taxpaying British public can see the PJ files now. A revelation!<br />The mcanns were made arguidos, Kate lied about jemmied shutters, deleted her texts and refused to answer any police questions. British CSI dogs detected blood residues and cadaver odour in the apartment, their hire car and on Kate's clothing. the Portugese prosecutor archived the case, but the Portugese high court clearly stated that the Mcanns were not deemed Innocent.<br />We can speculate that without a body (prima facie evidence) the Mcanns media campaign and being off shore, and the reliance on a large body of circumstantial evidence that they decided to let it lie. It can be re activated at any time. <br />Our time will come, one day, to see justice for a poor 4 year old girl. RIP MadelieneAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-30352736170818272882019-02-04T23:14:34.382+00:002019-02-04T23:14:34.382+00:00I believe there was an abductor. I believe Madelei...I believe there was an abductor. I believe Madeleine was a hostage for a short time and then disposed of.What kind of ransom I don't know.But MI were over there fast.So, I still believe the parents are innocent.They would have been arrested otherwise.maybe if they were arrested, the real culprits would go public to expose the real truth and the McCanns would be freed.<br /><br />I have to believe that the police forces of two countries wouldn't dare make such a categorical statement if they didn't mean it.Why can't you believe it ?<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-83379621055049698142019-02-04T23:12:52.634+00:002019-02-04T23:12:52.634+00:00Ah 20:21, when I began reading your long post, I h...Ah 20:21, when I began reading your long post, I hoped it was from someone other than Ziggy, or even a female Ziggy with whom I might connect. But, alas no, tis yourself again lol.<br /><br />You didn't suspect the parents, because they were in company and abroad. LOL, how very 'Mrs Bucket'. Being 'in company' doesn't add respectability, lol. Company could mean anything, from a lonely dosser to a saggy faced former famous person. If you are 'po white trash' being photographed next to Theresa May won't raise your social status. I remember as a kid the parents of my friends not inviting me in because 'they had company', I thought it pretentious and mean then and I still do now. I would not be in the least surprised if it came straight from Kate's mother.<br /><br />Second para, now you want to pin me down to providing links etc which is a game I will not play. Let's just say, blood found beneath a floor tile, suggests it's source from the upper level was cleaned up. The sofa was moved? Why? I don't know why you are pushing for a forensics argument, it really doesn't help your cause.<br /><br />Finally, I think 'slathering wolves' is a tad harsh. What an odd way to describe those who do not believe the McCanns' abduction tale. It is not necessary to be slathering or a wolf to find the abduction story unbelievable. You would have to be a complete moron to think they have been telling the truth.Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-89896463690650427722019-02-04T23:10:17.266+00:002019-02-04T23:10:17.266+00:00Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 21:...Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 21:36<br /><br />''It is only you Ziggy, who is claiming that the police are ignoring all the evidence presently available''<br /><br />Is it ? So what have the police done about it if they haven't ignored it.It's been 12 years.<br /><br />'' No-one else believes that Ziggy, the statements and the evidence collected in 2007 will never go away,''<br /><br />The police must.The only place where they haven't gone away is the internet.<br /><br />'' You are again in fantasy land if you believe it has.''<br /><br />Fantasy Land 2019.<br /><br />My claims of the involvement of important figures is based on the speed in which action was taken by a PM, a chancellor (?), home secretary and Military Intelligence shortly before the lead detective was removed and evidence apparently discarded as not valid.If of course you can cite other crime that have prompted politicians and prime ministers to get involved so fast and overrule the police then i'll take it back.<br /><br />'' Your scenario only works if the culprit(s) have something they are using to cajole and blackmail people in high places to do their bidding. ''<br /><br />Yes- I repeat - leverage.Politicians( in particular chief whips - see house of cards..or youtube Tim Fortescue) value leverage. Cash for questions, cash for arms cash for this or that.cash for silence.If we knew who had who by the short ones at any given time it would defeat the object of their exercise.<br /><br />I've dealt with your question Re why the protection and the apparent silence of the parents elsewhere.<br /><br />The protection is there and always has been.Why did they need it in the beginning if the world thought their daughter had been snatched.Why was it important for two intelligent and articulate people to stay quiet and let the Government press controller do the talking for them ( or for someone else ?).<br />There would be a lot of red faces if they were arrested now, I agree.It's been 12 years after all.I was talking about back in 2007.With all the supposed evidence it was a slam dunk according to those dedicating blogs to it all.Why didn't they arrest them ?<br /><br />It doesn't matter how long those who have dedicated themselves to this case have done so.The same things are being discussed and ideas promoted now as back in 2007 . The rest has been efforts to say why people think this or that( guesses based on nothing but old movies, books and documentaries).OG haven't uncovered anything.If they have why did they ask for more funding ?<br /><br />''If I were that way inclined I would draw a spider graph with links to all those who were involved and what charges they could face.''<br /><br />You'd have to know how many were involved and how first.<br /><br />''Going by the murder documentaries I have seen, ...''<br /><br />See- there it is again.If any detective told his boss he was watching old documentaries to use in the investigation he'd be sacked.No other crimes have anything to do with this one. If the police believe the parents have done something to their little girl that's resulted in the hiding of her body they would never say go easy at any point other than to lull them into a false sense of security, lower their guard and then they'd go for the throat.That's real life.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-14030132091733159712019-02-04T21:58:34.551+00:002019-02-04T21:58:34.551+00:00Well done on keeping up the bravado Ziggy, but you...Well done on keeping up the bravado Ziggy, but your arguments that the police know nothing are as hollow as your claim that no arrests in 12 years means the parents are innocent and the police are clueless. All wishful thinking on your part Ziggy.<br /><br />Still at least you are no longer claiming the police are looking for an abductor. Even you can see that they are not. Does that mean you accept there was no abductor? That's quite a break through. <br /><br />You state again that the police have declared the parents were not and definitely aren't suspects. I'm amazed in you have confidence in those statements given the number of times non suspects quickly become suspects. It's like Trump trying to reassure himself he is not under investigation. Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-47038400813393731142019-02-04T21:36:46.352+00:002019-02-04T21:36:46.352+00:00Wasn't it the solicitor who told Kate not to a...Wasn't it the solicitor who told Kate not to answer the police questions? And as dense as she is sometimes, even Kate knew that any answers she gave would be compared line by line to Gerry's and the game would be up.<br /><br />It is only you Ziggy, who is claiming that the police are ignoring all the evidence presently available, the inconsistent statements, the dogs, the freaky behaviour etc. No-one else believes that Ziggy, the statements and the evidence collected in 2007 will never go away, it is all integral to the solving of this case, none of it has been discarded. You are again in fantasy land if you believe it has.<br /><br />You seem to think there is an individual, or a small group of individuals high up in the government or in society, who has determined this case will never be solved and the two doctors never charged. Until you can put some substance on these shadowy figures, your claims are meaningless. Your scenario only works if the culprit(s) have something they are using to cajole and blackmail people in high places to do their bidding. <br /><br />Why are 'they' (the culprits?) so determined to protect two people they suspect killed their child. Why are the two people suspected of killing their child not screaming blue murder? Not at 'being protected' whatever that means, but at those covering up their daughter's death? <br /><br />And I don't believe they are being protected by the way, I believe they were protected in the early summer of 2007 but the protection came to an end when they were forced to leave Warners complex and move into a private villa. <br /><br />I don't think anyone would say that the families of Sabrina Aisenberg, Isabel Celis and Lisa Irwin are being protected. The parents of each of these missing children remain free even though they are all suspected of killing their children. It is not protection that keeps them out of jail, it is the lack of evidence to convict them. The same applies with the McCanns, except of course, their daughter's disappearance is still the subject of two live police investigations. <br /><br />'What damage would be done-and-to-whom if they were found guilty?' Other than a sea of red faces? Quite a bit I would imagine, and to quite a few people. Imagine for example being a TV criminologist and having got this case so badly wrong? Will anyone ever believe you again? Actually, would anyone even ask your opinion again?<br /><br />But that's merely the top layer, who knows what OG have found underneath. Those of us who have followed this case for years have a good idea of what OG have uncovered, and how far this web of lies goes, it has all the makings of a Public Inquiry, but in these fast moving news times, it will be lost in the quagmire.<br /><br />If I were that way inclined I would draw a spider graph with links to all those who were involved and what charges they could face. How many, for example, perverted the course of justice? How many could be charged with second degree murder, simply by being part of a group? Going by the murder documentaries I have seen, those just going along for the ride face the same charges as the one with the smoking gun. The list of defendants facing serious criminal charges must run to dozens, and must include whoever gave the instruction 'to go easy on the McCanns'. I have no doubt it is the magnitude of crimes that has kept this investigation open for so long. Perhaps it is a bit like the Mueller investigation, all those on the sidelines will be picked off first. Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-74309752463937500432019-02-04T21:18:05.544+00:002019-02-04T21:18:05.544+00:00Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 20:...Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 20:35<br /><br />''How can you claim the police are no nearer to solving the case than they were in 2007?''<br /><br />Madeleine vanished just prior to her 4th birthday. Three months from now will mark the date of her 16th birthday.No arrests.Nothing.<br /><br />''Why are they still being funded if they aren't doing anything? ''<br /><br />To make it appear as though it's a mystery to them and they don't have a clue where she vanished to .<br /><br />''I think that is a fantasy you have going on there Ziggy, but few share it. ''<br /><br />It's been 12 years. Fantasy ?<br /><br />'' We may not know what Operation Grange are up to, but we know it is something tangible that will reach a conclusion. ''<br /><br />If we don't know what they're doing we don't know if it's tangible. Where's the evidence ? Where's the arrests ? Where's the new evidence ? This has gone on longer than WW1 and WW2 combined.<br /><br />'' Politicians cannot treat government departments as their minions, ''<br /><br />They can and do.Often.<br /><br />''there are multiple ways to solve cold cases. The McCanns are vulnerable on many fronts.''<br /><br />The many fronts being the forensic evidence from 12 years ago which has remained there until this day.The eye witness testimony of nobody at all . The online detective agencie's photoshop investigation results. The contradictory testimonies of the Tapas group.The blood.The DNA. All that vulnerability plus a jury of about 50,000 finding them guilty with or without evidence because they've seen and heard of parents in other cases being guilty. Yes, very vulnerable.On top of all of this, both forces have gone on public record to state that the parents were not and definitely aren't suspects.Very vulnerable..<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-84871565195132113902019-02-04T20:35:44.275+00:002019-02-04T20:35:44.275+00:00How can you claim the police are no nearer to solv...How can you claim the police are no nearer to solving the case than they were in 2007? Why are they still being funded if they aren't doing anything? I think that is a fantasy you have going on there Ziggy, but few share it. We may not know what Operation Grange are up to, but we know it is something tangible that will reach a conclusion. <br /><br />As for checks and measures disappearing when you go higher up, again, you are wrong. Politicians cannot treat government departments as their minions, they cannot override the Law to make unpalatable facts disappear. Again, you are in the realms of fantasy.<br /><br />No, I'm not just talking about crimes that occurred prior to DNA. True in many cases new technology can give accurate results, but there are multiple ways to solve cold cases. The McCanns are vulnerable on many fronts.Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-41648241799044652792019-02-04T20:21:03.617+00:002019-02-04T20:21:03.617+00:00Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 13:...Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 13:31<br /><br />I believed Madeleine was dead about 2 days after she disappeared. I thought there was no way she would have walked off alone and not have been rescued.had it happened in Britain, I would- I confess- have suspected parental or family involvement for the usual reasons- ie, we've seen that so often.But I didn't suspect it as they were in company and abroad.They could only have ended her life by accident indirectly or otherwise and that wouldn't have seen a serious sentence.<br /><br />Which force has gone on record and committed to file that there was definite evidence of a clean up ? If they had found that to be the case then that points to guilt right away.That points to guilt more than the findings of dogs. And which officer/s went on record or on file to state he didn't believe the interpretation of the dogs findings as published ? Just Amaral ?<br /><br />I believe someone or people high up are behind it yes or involved at least.It's unthinkable but we live and learn do we not.We're still finding out that a few of the pillars of our society were far from it.Why would the parents believe that those who threw security around them and then money would have anything to do with it ? Nice work by those upstairs.It seems to have done the trick. We don't know the inner workings of the parents minds.As I've said, if they were to shout it from a rooftop they'd be publicly slaughtered for biting the hands that fed them.<br /><br />If there is /was a mass of evidence against the parents- please tell me why you think Scotland yard haven't admitted it.Why haven't they acted on it ?If there isn't involvement higher up, why would they want this case to continue as a play full of smoke and mirrors and nothing more ? Amaral's book is a book of what he thought and suspected-not of evidence.His book was allowed to be printed as long as we remembered it was literary and not factual.<br /><br />I think the whole game is a pretence.As you say- a lot of people knew early that Madeleine wasn't returning dead or alive.They had to be pretty confident to do what they did after that.<br /><br />Regarding the Tapas group. I'll ask you and the faithful again- why would they risk incriminating themselves if they hadn't done anything wrong ? They had careers and children themselves. A jail sentence would have wrecked the lot. Had they been found guilty of child neglect they wouldn't have lost their children or careers.They'd have received a slapped wrist and a fine and probably help from the British consulate any way . Pact of silence ? Probably due to the forensic scrutiny of the slavering wolves eager to pounce on so much as an incorrectly placed comma as reported by a biased press.say noting and nothing can be twisted.besides, if the police had the goods on them they couldn't use their private pact in a court of law...<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-67070863695299689772019-02-04T19:53:51.076+00:002019-02-04T19:53:51.076+00:00Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 14:...Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 14:50<br /><br />Bella ( belle of the ball ?)...<br /><br />You have asked the same question that I've been asking you and the faithful for a long time : how was it known so early that Madeleine wasn't going to turn up soon ? Or, if we want to be more direct- how did they know the game was already over ? The resignation of Mitchell to take a job that history suggested would only last a few weeks needs to be addressed by OG. But they wouldn't.<br /><br />Don't underestimate how a non-academic egotistical well connected halfwit can climb high.Boris Johnson is worse and he's almost a Tory leader.I recall seeing Cameron on Letterman. That's right- our PM. Letterman asked him a simple question. He asked what the magna carta was. Possibly the most significant piece of British history.Cameron got the jitters and said things like ' i should know this..you said there wouldn't be awkward questions'. Total moron.A total moron who was born a millionaire and had his passage paid for( so to speak) in all the UKs finest seats of learning.He inheritedthe McCann game shortly after Blair and Brown and ran to the highlands.But they all had their little meet-ups. They all ( the political 'enemies' of the Conservatives and Labour) found a handy little middle ground to sip pims and nibble on strawberries and Rebekah Brooks. The home of the lovely Matt Freud and a Murdoch; the infamous Chipping Norton set. R soles to a man ( and woman).<br /><br />Unfortunately we are living in the age of bells and whistles.As the masses continue to allow themselves to be dumbed down they settle for form over content every time.They want to be passive and let the big names and celebrities in flash places entertain and 'inform' them.Beckham ? Ok he's better looking than Posh. But he couldn't tie his own boot laces before he played a game.But now he's famous he's a 'spokesman' for everything.He's like Bono's stunt man.News only happens now via twitter and the people employed to tweet on behalf of celebrities who cant speak let alone spell.None of the McCann show /circus impressed me.I'm more interested in the unseen. A dancing puppet isn't clever. The man with the strings is.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-76079082445837717622019-02-04T19:29:49.907+00:002019-02-04T19:29:49.907+00:00Thanks for your diatribe in reply to my wonderful ...Thanks for your diatribe in reply to my wonderful post x<br /><br />Because you aren't buying the 'murky' stuff involving Murdoch , Freud and Co doesn't mean it isn't important or worthy of closer examination. God knows there's a shortage of genuine dots to join after 12 years. We know how low and underhand all things Murdoch/Sky/Mail are, and we now all know that Freud was no angel.How many staff of Sky had a home or holiday home in PDL ? it wasn't only Freud. The McCanns probably accepted the invitation out of politeness as the invitation was worded so sensitively.If they were going to be in PDL why not ? But you'll give all that a 'wtf'...<br /><br />My 'parents are clear' should have been worded more accurately now I think of it. Obviously they don't need to be cleared of anything if they haven't been charged with anything- ever. I should have said ' in the clear'. That's not my case- it's the official position of the investigative teams both here and in Portugal.They said it and announced it to the world via TV.OK it wasn't Twitter or Facebook- but they still said it. All i was doing was reminding you.But you won't have it and state that they are 'in the frame' ( as opposed to your old 'on the hook').I repeat- the parents have nothing to be cleared of. Only the public suspicion that lives and breeds on line have charged them.And that doesn't matter ( period).<br /><br />If I knew who the culprit was or who they are I'd say it.Al I've ever said is there is no conceivable reason for the police not to arrest the parents if they think they're guilty.A jury could well have been persuaded to buy into the dogs findings area of the investigation.They would have to know-not merely suspect- that the parents were innocent before they decided that the child was returning soon( enter recently - resigned Clarence) and agree to throw no end of money and politicians into it.<br /><br />I said it would only be right to close it now.This case has no moving parts and never did. It was over soon as it happened.They are no nearer now than back then in solving it.In the interest of their own integrity and public spending they should hurl the towel in.But, that would anger so many people.Mainly bloggers to be fair.So they should shelve it to go cold.That way hope would remain.I wasn't thinking of the parents when i suggested it.<br /><br />You say 'if crimes have been committed'. Madeleine ? When cover ups are high up the checks and measures disappear. Savile evaded investigation for decades. As did many politicians like Freud and Smith ( Cyril).All had leverage.<br />I too enjoy true crime.And most documentaries if they're big on fact and small on hysterical delivery.My passion is still the Wallace case as it was a few yards from where i grew up.That won't be solved now, it happened in 1931.The instances you refer to are mainly crimes that were committed decades ago pre- DNA and other advances in forensics. I'd like to think it was down to dogged and determined detectives.But that's hero worship.All any half bright detective would need to do is read an old case, note the dates and findings ( or lack of) that the forensic report has on it and try again with modern technology. Madeleine went missing in 2007. We had all that then and still do.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-22939742901223921892019-02-04T19:26:28.702+00:002019-02-04T19:26:28.702+00:00Yes, we all need an opportunity to wave our arms a...Yes, we all need an opportunity to wave our arms around now and then...<br /><br />A guilty person doesn't volunteer extra information for fear of being caught out. If she was playing a mind game, how do you explain the sudden reluctance to offer anything at all during the famous 48 questions debacle ?She had the opportunity to 'add substance' to her lies then- why didn't she take it ? Well trained detectives- and even Amaral- have heard it all before.They've been coached in the techniques criminals use to misdirect detectives . They know about 'scene painting' and know how to then misdirect the suspect and then bring him back to it later against the run of play.<br /><br />So, Bella....<br /><br />You think there's clear evidence of the abduction being staged by the parents. You think that a lab holds clear evidence that the child died and bled just prior to it.You think statements contradict themselves . You think the police are only looking for a corpse. despite them saying that is only another possibility they have to entertain.You think Amaral's many accusations are based on facts that would bring a conviction. So, please tell me the following. Why have the police ignored all of that and chosen instead to waste vast sums of money over such a wide span of time ? Why have they chosen not to call upon the findings of the dogs ? Why did the UK want Amaral removed before he had time to delve deeper ? Why are they so determined to protect two people they suspect killed their child and actually fund the efforts to keep an investigation open ?What damage would be done-and to whom- if they were found guilty ?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-24845000742366779412019-02-04T15:12:14.355+00:002019-02-04T15:12:14.355+00:00Hi Jane, yes the whooshing curtains story didn'...Hi Jane, yes the whooshing curtains story didn't appear until the McCanns started their media rounds. And didn't Kate only give one statement to the police? Her second interview was her infamous refusal to answer any of the 48 police questions.<br /><br />The whooshing curtains adds drama to scene, an opportunity for Kate to wave her arms around and a good memory tool. She is almost word and movement perfect, every time she repeats it. Like a toddler with head, shoulders, knees and toes, she knows exactly what to do and say next. <br /><br />It isn't natural to remember an incident so specifically, without extending on it or embellishing it with every retelling. Not to mention the fact that the incident is something you will torture yourself with for the remainder of your life. <br /><br />I know a lot of people went to a lot of trouble to prove the curtains couldn't have whooshed. But it was not necessary, Kate, like her husband, doesn't know when to shut up. She volunteers more information than necessary, it's what liars do when they sense they need to add substance to their lie. They are picking up that their lies are not being believed, so they over compensate. Hence, the bedroom door being ajar, the proud father moment, the whooshing curtains, there are countless examples, Gerry's blog and Kate's book are full of them. Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-37993421655192205802019-02-04T14:52:02.250+00:002019-02-04T14:52:02.250+00:00Yeh, I'm not buying all that Clement Freud and...Yeh, I'm not buying all that Clement Freud and the Murdochs and all that murky stuff. The McCanns dinner with Mr. Freud, was weird. His invitation and their acceptance at such a traumatic time. When I lost my dear old dad, I couldn't bear company of any sort, I certainly couldn't have attended a dinner with a celebrity, even had it been Brad Pitt. Wtf are Gerry and Kate made of? Their tiny child was missing! It was inappropriate on so many levels. Didn't they also have dinner with the creepy Ray Wyre, the architect of so much horrific child abuse in the 1980's?<br /><br />You end your diatribe with 'so the parents are clear' as if you have made your case. Except you haven't, the parents are well and truly in the frame in the minds of most of those who take interest in this case, and in the minds of the police. The only way the parents can be cleared is if they face a trial and are found not guilty. Until then every option is open. <br /><br />You say naming the culprits, the 'brown stuff' (yuck) will hit the fan at speed and there be fall out'. What brown stuff? What fall out? The culprits presumably are not the McCanns, so who are they? Why is the notion of this, a dangerous game? <br /><br />Bizarre you think the investigation should be closed now. Placed on a cold shelf to appease those who feel justice has not been served. You have me confused Ziggy, you profess to being on the side of the parents, so why are you not demanding answers? Were you not on the campaign when the McCanns were petitioning for a Review? Surely the police closing the file now would be the last thing the parents would want? <br /><br />It won't be a political decision. If crimes have been committed, and clearly OG believe they have, hence this is still a live investigation, then those guilty of the crimes will be prosecuted. Politicians cannot interfere with the Justice system, they can't overrule the Crown Prosecution Services and Judges. There are checks and balances in place that prevent individuals from interfering with the Law specifically to prevent cover ups and corruption. <br /><br />Don't be lulled into a false sense of security by the 12 long years Ziggy. As you know, I am a fan of real crime documentaries, and it is unbelievable how many years can pass between a murder and a conviction. Some murderers can get that knock on the door even decades later. These cases do of course have dogged, tenacious investigators who refuse to give up. But so too has Madeleine's case, there are still detectives here in the UK and in Portugal who are determined to see this case through to the end. As Cressida Dick recently confirmed, this case will reach a conclusion. Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-25994118323198901982019-02-04T14:50:20.938+00:002019-02-04T14:50:20.938+00:00Apologies Ziggy, and apologies to my dear friend t...Apologies Ziggy, and apologies to my dear friend the Major. I quite like the name Bella, and on the old AOL boards I was known affectionately as 'Bell', unaffectionately as 'Bellend', which happily I did not know the meaning of, lol. <br /><br />Clarence Mitchell is not a politician and never will be. He is where he is because of his 'street smarts', not his academic ability or his understanding of complex government policy. He is too one dimensional to be a politician, he cannot see beyond the barrow in Petticoat Lane. He connects with no-one. Who is his base? A thin stream of Daily Mail readers who are as blasé with their political opinions as he is. <br /><br />Clarence Mitchell is an opportunist, he is motivated by fame and money, perhaps even in that order, he loves the camera. Being spokesman for the most famous victims of crime in the world, was an opportunity he was not going to miss. <br /><br />Remember how happy they all were in that summer of 2007, enjoying an extended holiday with their family, friends and fellow plotters. They were going to take over the world with their massive (not a)charity Madeleine Fund and 'Keeping Up with The McCanns' home videos. They were hobnobbing with the Pope and Gerry was flying out to meet the press in Edinburgh (why are you are, asked the interviewer)and Washington. Imagine a small group of narcissistic 'alphas' and wannabe TV stars who enjoyed playing tennis, gathered together in a picturesque holiday resort watching the cash literally pouring in by the million? <br /><br />Clarence was not the only one to give up his secure, high paying job, so too did John McCann and all those caring relatives and friends who flew out to PDL. It seems the only thing they weren't preparing for among their many meetings, was the possibly of Madeleine turning up, either dead or alive. How could they all be so certain Madeleine would not be found that they were making plans for the future? Gerry's wider agenda, his annual Madeleine Day for the whole world?<br /><br /><br />Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-72793990434437893182019-02-04T13:39:23.335+00:002019-02-04T13:39:23.335+00:00Anonymous4 February 2019 at 10:48
All my argument...Anonymous4 February 2019 at 10:48<br /><br />All my arguments are cogent.And jemmying and the phrase are all but archaic.This case aside how often do you hear it. you say :<br /><br />'' it as an irrefutable lie....picked up by the press ''<br /><br />Irrefutable means impossible to oppose.You are accusing the police of detectives of two countries liars- correct ? The press are reporting on the case by the way, not investigating it. If the British public choose to go by the press rather than the police, then there's a reason it should be quiet until it knows what day it is.<br /><br />I didn't 'throe in' any 'the police were incompetent'.I was asking who i was replying to if that what he was suggesting without directly stating it.But, having said that, it is incompetent to fail to secure a crime scene.Fact.Even if it was an abduction.They would need to look for forensic evidence, foot prints, finger prints etc.<br /><br />Your claims about DNA / Blood don't count.The claims of the forensics teams who examined them does. There is no evidence of a staged abduction.Even if there was there would have to be evidence that the Mccanns were responsible for that staging when it could be argued anyone who had broke in and killed the child on purpose or by accident is equally capable.<br /><br />I don't think you can change the investigation by typing that there was no abduction in capital letters by the way.But good effort..<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-9070104955613294892019-02-04T13:31:12.882+00:002019-02-04T13:31:12.882+00:00You seem to be edging towards acceptance that Made...You seem to be edging towards acceptance that Madeleine is dead 02:03, though still maintaining the McCanns are totally innocent. <br /><br />Death in the apartment is going to be a hard one for the McCanns and their supporters to spin. No evidence of a murder at the designated crime scene, Apartment 5A, suggests they cleaned up and why on earth would they do that if they were not involved? However, they clearly did not clean up enough to fool the specialist blood and cadaver dogs who both alerted to a spot behind the sofa.<br /><br />You suggest someone 'too high up' is responsible for what happened to Madeleine. If the parents truly believed this, then why are they not screaming it from rooftops? This notion of being 'too high up' to be prosecuted is absurd. No-one is above the law. Kings, Princes, Presidents, Evil Doctors, all can and have been investigated and prosecuted throughout the world and throughout history. And in this new age of information, there is no free pass for anyone. As the McCanns have discovered to the tune of about £5m, no-one can buy good press or silence the bad stuff. <br /><br />No evidence against the parents. Errm, there is masses of evidence against the parents, see the police files and Goncalo Amaral's book, which is why they were made arguidos. 'No signs of a body, dead or alive?', seriously? You are pretending the dog alerts didn't happen, attempting to write them out of the narrative, why would you do that?<br /><br />Why do you think Operation Grange is a 'pretence' at an investigation? Are you not happy that Scotland Yard are continuing to search for Madeleine? Aren't your hopes, and the hopes of the police, the same?<br /><br />As for the tapas friends who accompanied the McCanns on this holiday, I believe they firmly in the thick of it. They are each others' alibis! And they don't ever want to do a reconstruction, because all their alibis would be blown apart. <br /><br />Potentially, the Tapas Six, the doctors were in extreme legal jeopardy. Criminal charges of child endangerment, or child abandonment does not sit well on the record of an ambitious 30 something medical professional. As Gerry has said, many times, they came to a collective decision and via Dr. Payne, a pact of silence. <br />Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-70025395043893599512019-02-04T13:28:35.599+00:002019-02-04T13:28:35.599+00:00If i may reply to your interjection, Bella( my new...If i may reply to your interjection, Bella( my new name for you)...<br /><br />I think you have mistakenly challenged my dear comrade, major T for claims that I have made. as you know, I'm a certain Starman ;-)<br /><br />Why would Clarence leave a well paid privileged position ? Because his boss asked him to and explained why.You see, Clarence is many things, but stupid isn't one of them. With that in mind, a far more important question would ask why he left a highly paid important position to be a spokesman for the parents of a missing child if that child ( according to all known statistics) was likely to be found within days, possibly weeks either dead or alive and being hidden.He would have thought of that.So what was it that made him realise so early that the child wouldn't be showing up any time soon.Who knew this ?He must have been given a guarantee if he resigned so quickly.<br /><br />Mitchell was -and is- like all politicians, 100% loyal to whoever signs his salary cheques.He used to play for Labour then he was sold to the Conservatives.He was equally passionate for these opposing forces.He was also a BBC media man until he was caught live on camera snoring.Then he joined Murdochs army and was 'the face' of other big headline high profile crimes like Soham and Dando. So, he was a familiar face; a face we were able to allegedly trust.A good signing.But he was a politician on the inside of the McCann camp as well as those two parties.<br /><br />Another face we could trust was that of Clement Freud.A long career in politics was then ended to take up a long career as a celebrity. he was possibly the first big celebrity politician with his deadpan face, monotone voice, dry humour and his surprising double life as a bon viveur, race horse owning, champagne swilling cordon bleu chef.He was a popular 'loveable' figure in the public eye.He was also very close to the Murdochs socially and was related through marriage.Now his name is associated with sexual perversion and the secrets he, Cyril Smith and Jeremy Thorpe shared and took to the grave.He ingratiated himself into the McCann family with offers of a sympathetic ear and good food.Why would they refuse ? Significantly, it's on record how he would begin conversations with the McCanns by cracking ironic jokes about the media, thus opening the door for discussions of it's reporting and reporters.His daughter was married to a Murdoch.<br />Through the Governments man and through Murdochs man, the secret thoughts and suspicions of the McCanns were given in confidence and no doubt taken back to said Government and Sky / Mail.<br /><br />The evidence of the case is the bone of contention.Many are saying it's enough to get a conviction, others don't as those who decide such have said it isn't.But-it could be made to fit couldn't it ? Those with the power to move the pieces could do it any time they chose.And that could lead to a conviction of one or both parents.They'd know that.So they don't say too much and they go with the official line.Hence the 12 year stale mate.<br /><br />So, the parents are clear.That's been stated by both forces.Nobody else is in the frame.The culprit is home and dry.If that culprit or those culprits are named or the fingers of suspicion accuse them and name them, then the brown stuff would hit the fan at speed and there would be a fall out. That's a dangerous game.It's about time the police closed it now.They could put it on the cold shelf for the sake of those who would be enraged by it being forgotten.It's a tricky decision.May isn't up to it.Nor will Corbyn be. And without a political decision ( in this police matter), it won't happen.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-53982525823162860012019-02-04T10:48:33.010+00:002019-02-04T10:48:33.010+00:00Ros, you really should raise this topic! 13.47 can...Ros, you really should raise this topic! 13.47 can't provide a cogent and evidenced based argument. Then states that 'jemmying of shutters is all but archaic' when we know it as an irrefutable lie, which was picked up by the press and triggered disbelief with the police and now and at last, the British public.<br />13.17 also tries to throw in a bit of 'the police were incompetent' in failing to seal a crime scene; when according to the parents it was an abduction(a really big, unproven and without any evidence lie), so the PJ should be searching the streets and sealing borders see the fictional book Madeline by Kate Healy.... THERE WAS NO ABDUCTION.<br />The Brit CSI dogs found Mcann family blood traces under a tile, with 15 out of 19 markers identifying Maddie, when assessed using the LCN DNA analysis. Enough to support a prosecution in the UK, but not in Portugal.<br />TFALAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-64790290211764196452019-02-04T02:03:37.738+00:002019-02-04T02:03:37.738+00:00Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 01:...Rosalinda, Cristobell Hutton4 February 2019 at 01:10<br /><br />''The first two police officers at the scene thought the abduction was staged and the behaviour of the parents downright weird 13:47.''<br /><br />Any copper who turns up at such a dramatic, chaotic scene who has a suspicion should then go about testing it.'Weird' is a subjective interpretation.It's speculation and opinion even on the part of the policemen.How do people act when they're miles from home and their toddler has disappeared ? Normal ? What's 'normal' ?<br /><br />When a child goes missing the police are geared to asking as many questions on the spot to assist in their search.They don't pull out a book of statistics.If they did that, all kids who weren't killed or hurt by their parents wouldn't be searched for.<br /><br />How i expect the police to act is standard. A child has gone missing.If they think a parent is hiding something( acting weird?) they should examine every inch of the scene for evidence of a clean up.Trained eyes would detect a clean up of a crime scene.<br /><br />Once the police were present it was a priority to preserve the crime scene.They were as guilty as anyone else in failing to do so.But the parents were thinking as parents; the police weren't thinking like policemen. If a good, careful clean up had taken place, Gerry wouldn't have needed to tamper with anything.<br /><br />Yes. i get the '2 dogs' thing.I worked it out all by myself.I was clarifying in my reply that the cadaver dog wasn't there to identify blood, as the original poster stated.<br /><br />You're implying that the Tapas group willingly conspired to conceal a crime they had noting to do with, thus risking having their own families wrecked, careers ruined and jail terms.I suggest they had every reason not to. It makes no sense.Why would they ?<br /><br />Who has ever heard of a 4 yr old being stalked ? Go and interview some paedophiles behind bars, or those convicted of procuring or trafficking children.If 4 yr old blonde caucasian girls are your 'thing' then she fitted the bill.That, unfortunately, is how that works.<br /><br />My fingers are never in my ears and my eyes are never closed.I'm always prepared to read or listen to anything then examine it's validity.This case hasn't been asleep for 12 years just because my ears are full of finger.It's because there is no evidence to convict the parents and any that was there to convict anyone lse won't ever see the light.Too high up...<br /><br />''No abductor. No sign of an Abductor, no search for an abductor. No [more] pretence by the police that Madeleine may be alive''<br /><br />No evidence against the parents.No forensics . No signs of a body dead or alive.The pretence is that the police are still investigating this garbage.The funding by the government in these times of austerity is evidence that they think it's important to appear to keep at it.When Madeleine vanished she was due to begin Infants school.In three months she would be eligible to apply for a driving license, join the armed forces, get married or apply for a place in University.In all that time the evidence hasn't changed in the forensics lab and no statements have emerged.No confessions and no informants.Tell me about pretence.If there was no abductor then paedophile have to be on the list of suspects.So do murderers.If there ever is a time they say they have strong enough evidence of a body being there they then have to have equally strong evidence that somebody killed the child and who that was.Cadaver dogs identify death, not murderers.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-1708939816995927022019-02-04T01:47:23.726+00:002019-02-04T01:47:23.726+00:00If you don't mind my interjecting Major.....
...If you don't mind my interjecting Major.....<br /><br />Why did Clarence give up his privileged, though lowly, position in Labour's press office to work as spokesman for the McCann's. Let me ask you to stop for one moment and reintroduce yourself to Mr. Mitchell. Hmm. Little fish in big pool .v. big fish in little pool? The world's cameras were on Gerry, Kate and Clarence, the Madeleine Fund paypal button was kerjinging at record rates, 50m and rising. Gerry was talking about an annual Madeleine Day - for the whole world. He was smarmed and seduced, but I think it was a two way street.<br /><br />Finally, I believe the McCans were given a safe blanket, but that safe blanket is now a distant memory. It was whipped away as soon as there was talk of them being suspects. OK, it wasn't a clean break, but it was enough for them to make a dash back to the UK. <br /><br />I don't think they have a guarantee of never being charged. No-one is above the law. If they were to be left to 'get away with it', the investigation would have closed years ago, with enough some sort of explanation that would see them cleared and the case forgotten. The opposite has happened.Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-834822786084044829.post-67327708574133480032019-02-04T01:26:53.624+00:002019-02-04T01:26:53.624+00:00Ah nice try at attempting to link the theory of Go...Ah nice try at attempting to link the theory of Goncalo Amaral to the weirdos who are still attempting to persuade the public a)there was a paedophile gang and b)they were all swingers whooping it up at Warners holiday park. <br /><br />Hardly! So why hasn't Goncalo Amaral rallied a European army to his cause? Maybe because he knows, truth will always find a way, no matter how long it takes. Unfortunately, readers of 'The Truth of the Lie', do not have the collective power to alter the law and the justice system. However, some readers, those in Scotland Yard for example, do have the power to reveal the truth of the lie, and I think that is exactly what they doing. Rosalinda Huttonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01497239700092619580noreply@blogger.com